Critiquing “Kickboxer”..Muay Thai, it is not.

Wow..the moves from the 1^st fight are quite legit. Liver kick and then a spinning back fist.

“You don’t win fights with that tip-tap shit…power..power kicks!” True, those tip-tap slap sidekicks that VD was throwing only wins matches if they were point-based. Plus they expose you to many possible counters. VD’s elder bro was throwing too much tip-toe into the high kick…power yes but he was compromising balance. And also, VD was not standing in a proper mitt stance thus he got rocked off his stance easily.

Damn, Bangkok stadium is small….from the looks of it, it is just a community stadium. And the Muay Thai music that they were playing was weird. The Thai champ was kicking a concrete pillar HARD…now that is funny. And he had some weird Chinese pigtail…which is totally not Nak Muay in any way. Then he does a nipple twist gesture to VD to intimidate him….funny shit! The fight looks stiff. Champ lands a sok which knocks out elder bro for the first count out. Champ doesn’t block and just takes hits because I guess he is tough. Then he catches elder bro’s kick and headbutts him. Headbutt?! Was that allowed in 1989s Muay Thai? Then he clinches him up in the high clinch and repeatedly throw khaos to his body. That much is legit. No hydration and ice pack in between rounds, they just fan their fighters with a huge cloth. VD throws in the towel but the champ kicks it away and the champ finishes off VD’s elder bro with an elbow to his back as he was trying to stand up. Officials rush to aid him and 1 guy keeps fanning him with the towel. Why are they so obsessed with fanning people? He tears his opponent’s belt at the end of the fight..with his gloves still on nonetheless! They just leave him out on the street with no medical care….talk about unsanctioned!

Meeting with the Kru..Kru jumps up in front of VD and d

oes crazy fast kicks and punches, “your defense stinks.”  Hahah…now that is so off that it isn’t even funny. Thai village life...rabbits are definitely not commonplace in rural Thailand. Why is the Kru doing Tai Chi hand movements and Kung Fu style kicks? They must have had their “Asians” confused for one another. Kru drops coconut on VD’s abs to train him to breath out. Legit..we still do this today but with light medicine balls. Kru asks him to do Karate style tip-tappy kicks (naw…he should have had him doing MT continuous RH kicks instead) and Karate style sidekicks. VD was not kicking through with his RH kicks and therefore the banana tree trunk was “kicking back”. Anyways, their accent sounds Chinese and their names sound very Chinese too.

The pub brawl scene is funny too. As usual in M.A.D situation, the baddies come at VD one at a time. Baddy breaks glass but stands there wide open and allows VD to nail him with a spinning backheel.

VD’s first Muay Thai fight is very stiff…again. They just stand in the centre and trade RH body kicks, no shin checks…nothing. He earns himself the fight nick of “Nak Su Khao”/ White warrior by finishing his opponent with 3 RH headkicks into a farajkhe Jad Hee. A bit of an overkill if you ask me. :P

There is quite of romantic mysticism in this movie as benefitting the era and orientalism. Wonder who started the martial myth of old Muay Thai fighters covering their stringed fists with glass shards?

When VD does his come around in the final fight, it is purely stylized and with no actual technical or tactical realism. He just comes to it when he sees that his brother is no longer held hostage, he just hits the “Nak Su Khao” switch on and suddenly all his strikes hit and the champ seems utterly useless. He even does the retarded windwiper  kick on the champ.

The truth about Fats (BBC documentary)

Some fun facts that I learned from the above mentioned documentary.

Fatty meals affect one’s blood sample. The cloudiness of the plasma indicates how much fat is infused into one’s blood.

We can MRI scan for our fat content and the distribution of the fat. Fat deposits right under our skin and our organs.

In a healthy diet, 1/3 of our calories should come from fats. Very few foods contain no fat at all. Even vegetables contain a bit of fat.

Fats make food tastier by soaking up flavor and releasing it more gradually in our mouths.

Saturated fats from dairy products are less harmful than saturated fats from processed meats.

Healthy fats such as Omega 3 are found in fish. Some fishes store their fats in their flesh and therefore when we eat them, we receive their omega 3. We can dry out microalgae and eat it and get their omega oils and nutrients.

A diet lacking in fats means that our bodies need to supplement from other energy sources and therefore we may have to eat more of other foods. Stomach issues may result and energy levels may dip when we cut excessive amounts of fat from our diet. Pre and post fat diet eye tracking showed that volunteers subconsciously target and crave food that contains larger amounts of fat. 

Geisha...those Japanese ladies with "too much" makeup

Watched a documentary about Geishas and I learned quite a bit of new and interesting facts. 

Only virgin girls are allowed to be Geishas. Kyoto is still the cultural center of the Geisha tradition. Formal Geisha training as a Maiko can last up to 5 years and cost $500,000 in modern times. Geisha means “Arts person”. They must practice and perfect traditional Japanese arts (dancing and tea ceremony) and music. During the feudal Japanese period, the Geishas were not allowed to prostitute so as not to clash with the courtesans’ business. Geishas also wore their hair pieces simple and their Obi’s were tied behind as compared to the courtesans who wore colourful hair pieces and their Obi’s in front. In modern times, older and more experienced Geishas do not wear full makeup, wear inner white collars (instead of red inner collars), bright Kimonos and simple hair pieces. They can move out of Geisha houses and take on appointments as they seem fit. An interviewed Japanese wife remarked, "In traditional Japanese families, wives do not necessarily interact with their husbands. Their social role is to run the household. Their husbands would rather talk to and interact with Geishas . It is not “appropriate” to compare wives with Geisha." Now that boggles my mind quite a bit. 

The first Geisha, Okichi, to fall in love with the American consul, was abandoned and was ridiculed by the largely xenophobic Japanese and so she fell into alcoholism and finally, suicide.

The Geishas were increasingly sought after as wives by the ruling Japanese class as they were trained in how to take care of and serve men well and also kept secrets.

Coffee girls became a serious threat to Geishas during the 1920s. Geishas sought to remain as curators of Japanese culture as opposed to being leaders of women fashion in the past.

Emperor Hirohito then brought on the age of Imperial Japan and Geisha recruitment numbers swelled as they were upheld to be one of the bastions of Japanese culture. Poor families thus started selling their daughters to Geisha houses because of high demand. There they worked as slaves. They would be bought by and provided for by a patron. When the girls hit a certain age, their virginities would be sold off and the deflowering would be conducted in a very ritualistic manner. Patrons still exist today but sex is highly frowned upon in proper society and is no longer a practice. Geishas cannot marry but can have children of their patrons. Daughters of Geisha are expected to follow the tradition but there is no role of the sons of Geishas.

Olden Geisha face paint used to contain lead and would poison the Geisha’s face yellow! Kimonos are extremely precious to Geishas and their choices of Kimono are dictated by the calendar. Different colored Kimonos are symbolic for the different seasons. Hair pieces need to be attached to Geisha’s heads as the constant pulling and weight often cause premature balding. The Geishas then need to sleep on wooden boxes and not wash their hair for a week so as to upset their hair arrangements. 

Alan Turing

Alan Turing was not a well known figure during his lifetime. But today he is famous for being an eccentric yet passionate British mathematician, who conceived modern computing and played a crucial part in the Allied victory over Nazi Germany in WW2.

He was also a victim of mid-20th Century attitudes to homosexuality – he was chemically castrated before dying at the age of 41.

In December 2013, Alan Turing was granted a posthumous royal pardon, formally cancelling his criminal conviction.

It followed a four-year campaign supported by tens of thousands of people, including scientists Stephen Hawking and Richard Dawkins. Opinion was divided on whether singling out an individual in this way did true justice to a situation in which thousands of gay men had been criminalised.

Stanford Prison Experiment

Good people in a bad environment?  Which would win out?

The “guards” wore uniforms which served as symbols of differentiation, authority and power. They would also wore sunglasses which would allow them psychological difference and be dehumanised so that they could act in an inhuman manner easier.

Day 2 saw a rebellion as some prisoners were frustrated at the anonymity. The guards then acted up against them to reinstall power. They were repeatedly woken up and given menial tasks so they experienced unrest, anxiety and fatigue.

The “guards” then started a campaign of “divide & conquer” and destroyed “prisoner solidarity”. 

One “prisoner” decided to go on a hunger strike. The “guards” then put him in the “hole” and used the other “prisoners” to make him feel guilty and break his defiance.

"Only a few people were able to resist the situational temptations to yield to power and dominance while maintaining some semblance of morality and decency; obviously I was not among that noble class," Dr Zimbardo later wrote in his book, “The Lucifer Effect”.

Other psychologists visited the experiment and were sickened by the suffering of the “prisoners”. Zimbardo ended the experiment in the next day. The “prisoners” suffered shame and the “guards” suffered guilt. Safeguards were then installed.

Playing a role VS “adding to the script”? And why did the other “good guards” not speak up against the “bad guards”? 

A long overdue reflection on the "Dawn of the Planet of the Apes"

The Simian Flu causes the near extinction of the human species. The smallest organisms are the most adaptable and therefore the most probable downfall of a “grand” civilisation of advanced intelligent species.

The apes use jewellery, sign language, war paint and adopt team tactics to hunt. They also have social organisation and use resources to construct basic architecture.

The gun is a very strong symbol for power in this movie. The guns (brought and used by the human scout party) is the cause of initial mistrust. The stockpiled weapons are also the reason for confidence of the human settlers. And later Koba uses it to usurp power. Even more significantly, the apes later take over the weapon stockpiles and turn it on the human survivor colony.

Interpersonal vs political trust. Caesar and Malcolm strike up a friendship through needing to trust each other in various tenuous situations. They do not want to fight. Yet they will be unable to change the tide and control their respective sides. War has already begun between their sides as Caesar rightfully put it. Interpersonal trust is much easier to construct. Political trust is at best temporary. Koba and Caesar also lose their interpersonal ape trust (Which Caesar thought to be uncorruptible) over issues of political trust.

Koba is able to frame the humans for the assassination of Caesar and use their emotions to launch a fast offensive against the humans. This serves as a caution against reactionary politics. No matter how devastating the attack, we must always rationalise and execute a deliberated follow-up to the situation lest we play into the advantage of scheming parties.

“Dehumanising” the enemy (Apes) is ironic since the enemy isn’t human to begin with. Dreyfus repeatedly refers to the apes as “animals” even though they clearly possess intelligence, culture and technology. In this instance, his dehumanisation of the apes seeks to emphasize their “evil” ways and “unhuman-like” rationality. So the apes cannot and should not be reasoned or bargained with.  The apes will not show the humans mercy. Therefore likewise the humans cannot reason, bargain and show mercy to the apes. The other interesting example of this element is when Koba purposefully animalises himself so as to trick the human weapon testers to gain their confidence and lowers their guard. He eventually kills them as they thought of him as no more than an animal and not capable of “human” trickery.

It is hard to rationalise who is the wiser leader in the end? Koba or Caesar? It is easy to think of Caesar as the better as he is “kinder” but Koba’s political approach to the human colony is rational on some levels as it is pre-emptive. Eventually the humans and apes would clash as the humans would seek to rebuild their world and the apes, as another advanced colony, would be a direct competitor in a world of little and scarce resources. The humans would have the weapons stockpile and therefore the tactical advantage. So Koba’s approach is to wipe them out while the apes had the element of surprise before the humans wiped the apes out (eventually). Caesar’s approach was not entirely clear in the movie. He allowed for them to repair the dam and was not going to meddle in the humans’ affairs. It is left unseen whether he would then seek to strengthen the ape colony defences but it is arguable how much he would be able to do before the 2 colonies came into conflict eventually. It is not certain whether this short term peace would be able to translate into a long term peaceful co-existence between the 2 colonies. 

Another important issue in this movie is that of perspectivism. Ultimately, Koba has reason...no...REASONS...to mistrust humans given his life experiences. Caesar was much more privileged in that sense and therefore can trust humans to a larger degree. Their different life experiences therefore form their two differing but equally valid perspectives. In issues of politics, it is important (but difficult) to put aside one's own prejudices and perspectives and approach the matter based on cold hard rationalism. 

I watch "The Shinjuku Incident" again after 6 years

One theme that runs throughout the movie is “Contentment”.  It is about knowing one’s needs over one wants and knowing when to stop. “It’s for survival”, Steelhead’s companions eventually reason this to him and gang up on him. Every character in the movie doesn’t know when to stop. Some do like Steelhead and Yuko but it is too late for them eventually. They have already taken too many steps out to achieve their wants and not be able to step back from the world that they have brought themselves into. Delving deeper into Steelhead’s actions, we can truly question if all his motivations were purely needs. His fiancée was lost in Japan, so he needed to find her. He killed the border guard as he needed to get out of Japan. Once in Japan, he needed to acquire legal status. His friends were in peril so he needed to achieve safety for them and himself.

A good man in a bad world? If we contend ourselves with the reasoning that Steelhead needed to do those actions, we can still reason that he made bad decisions in order to achieve good goals. He chose to tamper with the slot machines to gain cash off them. He chose to sell fake cards so as to earn more money. These were actions that he understood to have big gains but big costs. Once the costs gathered, he didn’t know when to call it quits and kept rolling bigger. The worst decision that he made was to strike a deal to kill off the 2 Yakuza leaders (with Eguchi). That was the one step that he would never be able to step back from.

Perhaps the only example of someone who performs good actions to achieve her wants is Lily. She is seen throughout the movie helping others. Yet she manages to achieve her wants. The irony is that her greatest need (which is to be loved and held with utmost importance by Steelhead) was something that she could not achieve.

Power corrupts or were they always primed for “evil”? From running small scams to eventually running a territory, they were always involved in “evil” means. It is easy to fall in love with their small time roguish charms initially and be shocked by their eventual vileness. Jie was the main character that never wanted to do anything evil. His dream of selling chestnuts was legal and one that spoke of contentment and simple satisfaction. But eventually the world turned him cold and power gave him the chance to seek revenge on it as he became the bully. Another interesting irony is that Jie started the movie as the one who kindly brought in and sheltered Steelhead and suffered negatively for it. Later he used the task of “taking care of the new illegal migrants” to his advantage and benefitted for awhile but eventually paid for it too.

Jie also posts a philosophical question that has always been around. Are we who we are or what we do? Jie concludes that he was still a coward at the end of the movie and rightfully so because he confused being brave with being arrogant. He never allowed/trained himself to perform any actions that were brave. So he never transcended his cowardly nature through his actions. Feeling fear is natural as Steelhead’s character juxtaposes but it is what we do despite this fear which makes one brave. Admitting one’s faults is a start so Jie was right to admit to himself and others that he was cowardly by nature. But he was wrong to let it stop there and not confront and overcome it.

The laissez-faire approach that Steelhead took with leadership failed. He was firm when he was building things up but he was not when things were just starting to be settled. As a reluctant leader, he did not stay the course. The movie teaches us about the need for an authoritative approach…for the need to control his flock with some power/discipline?

No permanent allies…only permanent interests. Chinese using the Yakuza to bully the illegal immigrants. Yakuza using the illegal immigrants to get rid of a targeted segment of the illegal immigrants. Yakuza killing each other. Kitano-san using and dealing with Steelhead to arrest Eguchi. The age-old principle showed itself all too starkly in this movie.

Poetic justice? Eventually the movie allowed the viewers resolution through poetic justice. The Taiwanese boss getting his hand chopped off by Steelhead. Kitano-san cracking the case. HK boy getting killed after he killed Fatty and tried to kill Steelhead. Steelhead dying in the same manner that he saved Kitano-san from. Eguchi dying and with his last energy, he does the right thing but turning in the evidence. But of course the poetic justice are but small consolations because with the grave costs that many of the characters had to pay, we still step out feeling heavy which rightfully we should.  

Evolution of eyes

Eyes are all over the animal kingdom but no 2 pairs of eyes operate in the same manner. They evolved numerous times in different lineages and is a great example of divergent evolution. 600 million years ago, ocean life is simple. The ancestors of jellyfish have light sensitive organs called eye spots. Today jellyfish are able to use their eye spots to avoid predators and find food.

544 million years ago, the animals became faster and more plentiful.  Compound eyes appeared on trilobites and gave them a supreme survival advantage for 300 million years. Insects are modern day related predecessors of animals like trilobites. Insects have multiple lenses in their compound eyes. Dragon flies have 29,000 lenses in each of their eyes and they can capture images 5 times faster than us therefore allowing them to conduct skilful fast-paced aerial chases.    

Vertebrates’ eyes began as simple light receptors 550 million years ago during the Cambrian period in proto-fish animals. Carnivorous dinosaurs like Tyrannosaurus Rex had binocular line of sight which could provide depth perception and distance management while fighting and chasing prey.  Allosaurus’ head crest had a poorer overlap but could still succeed with an ambush predator strategy.

Rabbits have 360 degree vision and can see around and high up. Their vision is not 3 dimensional but could provide an all-round alarm system.

100 million years ago, mammals evolved night vision to stay out of the way of big dinosaurs and to exploit nightfall to feed and scavenge.  Large corneas allow more light to hit the retina and allow nocturnal mammals to succeed in the dark. Tarsiers have huge eyes which are almost all cornea and these eyes are bigger than their brains and skulls. Their eyes bulge out of their skulls and are held down by extra strong connective tissue. They then have to compensate for immovable eyes with the help of a neck which can turn 180 degrees.  Big cat eyes have a double retention system to capture light protons which produce eye shine that allow them to see their prey in the dark 6 times better than us.    

Eagle’s eyes are huge. Eagles are much lighter and smaller in size than us but their eyes are the same size as our’s. Their eyes also have 5 times the image resolution and are able to see 3 times further as compared to us.

Our primate ancestors evolved eyes that have good colour vision which allowed them to see red. Red leaves are younger and more nutritious. Binocular vision also allowed them to navigate throughout the tree tops and execute hand-eye coordination. But this made them vulnerable to predation from behind/from the skies. Primates then responded with group living and used communal vision to keep wary of predators. This group living then pushed the brain to evolve a bigger brain to understand and execute more sophisticated social interactions

The Permian extinction

The ancient mass extinction of the Permian geological period happened 250 million years ago. 95% of the species went extinct! Scientists have found evidence that volcanoes spilled out large amounts of CO2 which led to global warming and heated up the Permian ocean. Warm water cannot retain much oxygen and Hydrogen sulphide then starts to produce from the bacteria thriving in such waters. Hydrogen sulphide permeated the late Permian ocean and bubbled out of the oceans and killed life in the oceans and then on land too.

NOVA: The evolution of Communication

Communication between prey and predator? Preys can communicate poison by their skin color, like the Dart frog for example. Therefore predators will tend to stay away from them.


Ants communicate via hydrocarbons and create odours for communication via such hydrocarbons. Each ant job have a different odour. Scientists have been able to create particular responses in ant colonies by using dummy ants with various ant job odours.


The “Milky sea” phenomenon is created by bioluminescent bacteria who use chemicals to communicate with each other. Bacteria communicate to accomplish tasks that they would be unable to perform together: such as attacking a organism together or find food. These bacteria were lighting up to get fish to be eaten as they want to get into the stomach environments of fishes.

California ground squirrels use scent to mark territory. But these same scents leave behind olfactory cues that rattlesnakes use to hunt them Squirrels countered by chewing on shed rattlesnake skin and cloaked their scent by secreting it onto their own fur.

Scientists are now tracking whale communication via audio-detection buoy marker and satellites. Whale herds move over great distances in unison via very loud low frequency communication.

Wolf howls serve as communication of distance, location and as a form of defence (to indicate to enemies about the threatening size of their pack).

Song birds possess the most advanced vocal abilities. They can produce left and right frequencies. Sound penetrates their environment in 3 dimensions unlike visual communication which are easily blocked out by trees and foliage.

Chimps use body postures, hand signals, facial expressions and sounds to communicate. The similar areas in human and chimp brains light up when they communicate.

Recognise that you are being MANIPULATED

Why is there no "SINGAPORE STANDS WITH DEMOCRATIC IRAQ" FB group?

Why are there no Singaporeans writing open letters to ministers asking them to make a stand on the Iraqi crisis?

Why are there little/no (not that I have seen) posts which merge the Singapore and Iraqi flag?

There are war crimes (civilian casualties and wanton executions) happening right now in Iraq too. And the scale of the situation in Iraq is larger than what is happening in Gaza.

Simple. the besieged in Iraq are not as adept as Hamas (which allows the Palestinian people to be besieged for their benefit) at playing the politicking and "rally around the flag" game.

"Mr Mahmoud Abbas, the sometimes moderate, often ineffectual leader of the Palestinian Authority, just asked his rivals in Hamas a question that other bewildered people are also asking: “What are you trying to achieve by sending rockets?”"

"In reaction to these indiscriminately fired missiles, Israel has bombarded targets across Gaza, killing more than 100 people so far. Compared with violent death rates in other parts of the Middle East, the number is small. (More than 170,000 people have been killed in the Syrian civil war to date.) But it is large enough to suggest an answer to Mr Abbas’s question: Hamas is trying to get Israel to kill as many Palestinians as possible.

Dead Palestinians represent a crucial propaganda victory for the nihilists of Hamas. It is perverse, but true. It is also the best possible explanation for Hamas’ behaviour, because it has no other plausible strategic goal here."

-----The futility of prayer-----

The logical fallacies with regard to the act/concept of praying = Post-hoc rationalising + Patternicity + Agenticity + "Wishful thinking" fallacy + Credo Consolans + confirmation bias. In addition, the efficacy of prayer and its implied supernaturalism defies all known laws of Science. Lastly, the efficacy of prayer also has never been studied and proven mathematically and scientifically.

When I was younger and experienced pain/crisis, I remember making pleas and bargains with a "higher power" to help me and those involved because it was a natural thing to do...no one had instructed me to do this but I did. It was so natural, like it was a reflex action of sorts. I communicated with this "higher power" through my mind's voice.

Now that I am older and more critical, I don't do this anymore. I recognise that pain is either an emotional or physiological response/marker and focus on bettering the condition. How do I console myself? Things could be worse, which is always true. And others may be experiencing worse than me. Many are definitely experiencing and many have experienced worse than me.So I am always lucky/luckier. In addition, I am lucky to even be/have been alive and part of the beautiful evolutionary biological history of our planet.

And if I were to not succeed in overcoming this pain, I will die (at worst). And dying is nothing to fear. Sure, the pain if any to be endured when dying is something that any being with self-consciousness and a functioning nervous system would want to avoid. In addition, the emotional and psychological ties and tasks that we leave behind is something else that we seek to avoid. Beyond this, why is death nothing to fear? Well, simple. Ask yourself...do you remember anything before you were born? No. That is exactly how being dead feels like. NOTHING! You wouldn't even know that you are dead. (Anyone who does combat sports and has been choked out/knocked out would know what I am talking about, :P)

And if I were to know that I was to die. Sure. I will be sad....but I promise myself that I will only be sad for a while. And I will then rally myself to spend my last days effectively....to add value to the lives of others. As much as I have taken and benefited from others during my existence, it is then my moral duty to give back as much as I can and it would be selfish not to do so when I do know that I am going to die. That would be a good death.

Divine guidance? Divine inspiration? Spiritual consolation? Spiritual strength? These all originate from your mind and your mind is but a product of your brain which means that you have everything that you need in yourself to find strength and inspiration to overcome adversity.

So the next time you encounter pain/crisis.....Pray? Nah. Get off your butt and do something productive and tangible. Positive actions WILL improve our world

--More on Animal intelligence---

More good stuff from NOVA documentaries.

Bonobos and Chimps can cooperate on tasks but chimps will stop cooperating if the rewards are placed in one container. Bonobos will still go ahead and cooperate and share if the rewards were placed in one container.

Chimps can learn to ask for help when faced with tasks and help human researchers with task (which they understand the goal of).

 Chimps also can understand the actions of other chimps to be good and/or bad...they will then sabotage the other chimps if they did a bad action and innocent chimps would not be punished.

Chimps can also learn to recognise numbers as symbols and how they ascend/descend in pattern.

Apes learn by copying. There is a group of chimps who have learned (via copying) how to make and use spears to hunt bush-babies. They also have learned to enjoy taking baths in shallow water bodies. Thus ape groups have culture.

But emotions and impulsive actions deny chimps greater success in cooperation. Chimps consistently are unable to control choosing bigger rewards even though they were always given less as a result. The understanding of delayed gratification and better control over our emotions give us the edge in cooperative tasks.

Dogs are less volatile, more interested in human behavior/actions and more tolerant towards humans as compared to wolves. Border Collies are even able to make inferences when the information that they have doesn't gel with the orders that they have been given. The gene CTNND2 in the dog genome is found in the genome of Border Collies and is important in humans for cognitive development.

Octopus can learn how to undo puzzles in order to get to food. They also use their mental processing in order to put on camouflage to deceive predators. Pattern, color (brightness) and 3 dimensional shape are accomplished by octopus in 7/10s of a second. Octopus have also used environmental tools to hide and ambush prey: this shows cognitive planning.

Alex the parrot (1976-2007) was an ordinary bird who was trained by Dr Irene Pepperberg with items and names. He was very inquisitive, could make requests and identify similarities and differences. He could even combine symbols in new ways to create meaning (he termed cake as "yummy bread" when he first tried it) and simple maths. He had the intelligence level of a 5/6 years old child.

--Science of lust--

*good stuff from another NOVA documentary*

Men will act out in 'louder' mannerisms when attractive women are about. This is known as 'peacocking'.

Men also demonstrate more artistic creativity after coming into interactions with attractive women.

Women will demonstrate more kind actions when attractive men are about.

Men are designed to be lustful more often and get lustful easier so as to be more evolutionarily successful. Women tend to take longer and are less inclined to be lustful because the costs of choosing a wrong mate would be higher. 

Being in the presence of an attractive woman hikes the testosterone levels in men whether or not they consider her a prospective mate.

Some people are hypoactive sexually and often describe themselves as asexual. Others are hyperactive sexually. They have a mutation on a gene which controls dopamine.

People when primed to think about love rather than lust were more inclined to push away relationship alternatives and stay faithful. Love is an evolutionary design to get us to attract and be attracted and mate. Love on the other hand enables us to stay together to raise offspring.

The "warrior" gene

The "warrior" gene can be found in 1/3 of men but it does not necessarily make them more violent. Mice with the "warrior" gene (a dysfunctional version of the MAO-A gene, a neuro-gene) bite and scratch more.

How about people? Such people have less grey matter in the communication between their prefrontal cortex and their amygdala and more stimulation in their amygdala (the part of the brain which alerts us to danger). But nurture also plays a big part in whether such people exhibit aggressive behaviour.

People with Intermittent Explosive Disorder perceive danger when there may not be any. But do people with IED have the "warrior" gene? NO!

A combination of factors (mainly environment) determines whether someone will have IED. Therefore this is good news: we may not be able to change our genes but we definitely can change our environment.

"wear white"?

Another logical fallacy to point out on the same issue from this article

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/06/23/singapore-christians-and-muslims-join-forces-to-protest-against-gay-rights/

Another logical fallacy to point out on the same issue from this article.

“Return to Fitrah”, meaning innocence or nature -> "Naturalistic fallacy" OR "Appeal to nature fallacy" which logic is as follows: "...the assumption that because some quality or combination of qualities invariably and necessarily accompanies the quality of goodness, or is invariably and necessarily accompanied by it, or both, this quality or combination of qualities is identical with goodness. If, for example, it is believed that whatever is pleasant is and must be good, or that whatever is good is and must be pleasant, or both, it is committing the naturalistic fallacy to infer from this that goodness and pleasantness are one and the same quality. The naturalistic fallacy is the assumption that because the words 'good' and, say, 'pleasant' necessarily describe the same objects, they must attribute the same quality to them."

Simply put, whether something is natural or not has no fixed bearing on its goodness. Many natural things are harmful to us. Many unnatural (synthetic) things are good for us.

But if you wish to defend the logic of this slogan based on the term "innocence" as per religious understanding, then that is acceptable within the religious rationality of the community (if the meaning of the term "innocence" is agreed upon within the religious community).

Correct me if I am wrong but the religious meaning of "innocence" here points to the "original goodness"/ spiritual purity of an individual as how God created man (as according to the respective creation narrative mentioned) thus pointing to the problem of "nature VS nurture".

We cannot yet judge (from a non-religious point of view) the "nature vs nurture" argument in relation to one's sexual orientation as we just have not arrived at any conclusive evidence for either side of the argument yet. Therefore we should not then come a hasty judgement and continue to work to find the true answers as per critical thinking and then collectively come to a solution about the issue as per democratic principles.

Now I know some of my religious friends may take offence to this but a logical fallacy is a logical fallacy regardless of whichever individual of whatever faith used it. So I hope you see past any affiliations and just treat it as an issue of critical thought and logic.

Religion "still helps shape views on morality"....YUCKS

I think articles like this are misleading and counter-effective, 

http://news.asiaone.com/news/singapore/religion-still-helps-shape-views-morality

Honestly with regard to such nebulous issues like morality, is it really helpful to poll people based on vague questions like "Is it wrong?". 

Then again, if we were to keep the analysis of certain actions and the morality of these actions in vague emotivist labels like "wrong" then yes, you will get an emotive response to a moral issue and no further thought/reflection on the part of the respondent. The publication of such polls does not help breed moral actions...this instead reinforces a "react first, do not reflect" and then justify one's stand with being in the "moral majority" sequence.

Instead, we need to educate people that "right" and "wrong" labels are evolutionary, social and historical constructs as responses to environmental concerns. Only then can we move beyond 'right" and "wrong" and advance towards "better" and possibly even "best".

So many of our countrymen are stranded in the foggy world of cultural morality and understand themselves to being morally opposed to others when in reality, our moral sense are much closer than what we assume (see "the trolley problem" and how people of various faith react to it). This is because they have had no formal exposure to ethics (moral philosophy) and also lack knowledge on how cutting edge research (in neuroscience and animal behavioural studies) for example is enriching our understanding in this field.

And also, we will not proceed far as a critical thinking society if we do not allow for free constructive criticism (backed with evidence) about all set of beliefs/values. Labelling any set of beliefs/values as sacred and unquestionable does not allow for genuine critical thinking to flourish.

Lastly I lament the constant need for the maintenance of religious and racial harmony which comes from ignorant tribalism that a society founded on critical thinking and science (for example, see iGENEA: DNA Gennealogy research) will demolish. If only more people knew more science and allowed for their constructs to be destroyed with the clarity of science and critical thinking....

Nova's documentary on 'what animals are thinking'

Just finished watching Nova's documentary on 'what animals are thinking' and as usual I learned a lot from it.....Nova's documentaries are just awesomeness.  

Pigeons navigate to their home roosts through hearing the low frequency sounds of the location. Scientists at first theorized that they navigated through magnetic fields and smell but later eliminated these theories after experiments. 

Rats have displayed empathy and sharing of food in experiments featuring trapped companions and moral dilemmas (friend or food first?). Bonobos also released other bonobos to allow them to share fruits. Ants bit through nylon trappings to release other ants but only if they were their kin.

Dogs have displayed an understanding of fairness by refusing to 'perform' after repeated unfair treatment (the other test doggies got food for similar actions while they didn't). In another series of experiments, scientists found that the guilty expression that dogs displayed was in response to scolding from their owners and not because of guilt.

Slime mould have inter-cellular communication and can figure the most efficient way through a maze to find a food source.

Bees have a hive mind. In an experiment featuring a choice between 2 new hive locations, scouts came back and wiggle-danced to show the location of the new location. Convinced bees then spread the dance to communicate and convince more bees. They also interrupted the dancing of rival bees who supported the other hive location. Once a critical mass was achieved, they departed en masse to the new location.

Monkeys would steal when no one's looking.

The ability of animals to think, communicate, plan and adapt gives us a better understanding of our once narrow and species-centric conception of intelligence.

The moral sense of animals gives us clues as to how our morals developed and allows us to reflect our own moral concepts. It also imbues us with greater humility and a greater sense of awe as to how we fit in with the the rest of our living world.

---'Why people believe weird things' by Michael Shermer--

---'Why people believe weird things' by Michael Shermer--

Interesting 'newbies' from the book
1. People confuse skeptics with cynic. 
2. I am therefore I think..sum ergo cogito

-Why do people believe weird things-
1. We evolved to be skilled pattern-finding and casual-finding creatures. 

2. Credo consolans- because they want to. It feels good and comforting. 

Traditional psychology is formal, expensive and time-consuming. Deep insight and improvement may take months or years. Delay of gratification is the norm, instant gratification the exception.

3. Simplicity. Immediate gratification of one's beliefs is made all the easier by simple explanations for an often complex and contingent world. Scientific and critical thinking does not come naturally and needs training, experience and effort.

4. Others believe in weird things for reasons of morality and meaning.

5. Hypnopompic hallucinations: visions of the supernatural that occur as one emerges from deep sleep. Hypnagogic hallucinations: occurs soon after falling asleep

6. People have errors in thinking because:
a. Without corroborative evidence, anecdotes do not make a science
b. scientific language does not make a science
c. Heresy does not equal correctness
d. Burden of proof lies with the person making the claim
e. Emotive words provoke emotion and obscure rationality

7. Confirmation bias. Paranoia is just another form of confirmation bias.

Psychics depend on the power of confirmation bias by telling their clients what to expect in their future.

-Why do smart people also believe in weird things?-
1. They are smart and good at defending their illogical beliefs.

Although there is some evidence that intelligent people are slightly less likely to believe in some superstitions and paranormal beliefs, overall conclusions are equivocal and limited.

2. For the most part, intelligence is orthogonal to and independent of belief.

3. Smart people might be smart in only 1 field.

4. Intellectual attribution bias where we consider our own actions as being rationally motivated whereas we see those of others as more emotionally driven.

- Belief in weird things as related to profession, gender and age-
With regard to psychic belief, women are the vast majority. Ufology are guy beliefs. There are No differences between men and women in the power of belief, only in what they choose to believe.

People under thirty were more superstitious than older age groups. Religiosity and belief in god steadily decreased with age until about 75 when it went back up.

Psychologists were the most skeptical of all because they best understand the psychology of belief and how easy it is to be fooled,

Deep commitment to belief in esp entails that one has a strong internal locus of control.