WEBVTT - STBYM Listener Mail: Laser Blade

0:00:03.000 --> 0:00:06.040
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of iHeartRadio.

0:00:10.240 --> 0:00:12.920
<v Speaker 2>Hey you welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind. Listener mail.

0:00:13.039 --> 0:00:14.280
<v Speaker 2>My name is Robert Lamb.

0:00:14.320 --> 0:00:17.319
<v Speaker 3>And I am Joe McCormick. And on these episodes of

0:00:17.320 --> 0:00:19.959
<v Speaker 3>Stuff to Blow Your Mind, we read back messages from

0:00:20.040 --> 0:00:22.600
<v Speaker 3>the email address. If you would like to get in

0:00:22.680 --> 0:00:24.919
<v Speaker 3>touch and you've never done it before, please give it

0:00:24.960 --> 0:00:28.440
<v Speaker 3>a go. You can reach us at contact at stuff

0:00:28.520 --> 0:00:32.040
<v Speaker 3>to Blow your Mind dot com. All types of messages

0:00:32.080 --> 0:00:34.640
<v Speaker 3>are welcome, especially if you would like to add something

0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:37.120
<v Speaker 3>interesting related to a topic we've talked about on the show.

0:00:37.159 --> 0:00:40.320
<v Speaker 3>But also corrections are always appreciated if we make a

0:00:40.360 --> 0:00:44.280
<v Speaker 3>mistake random trivia. You think we would be into suggestions

0:00:44.280 --> 0:00:47.480
<v Speaker 3>for future show topics or suggestions for movies for Weird

0:00:47.479 --> 0:00:50.600
<v Speaker 3>House Cinema. Any feedback to Stuff to Blow your Mind

0:00:50.600 --> 0:00:54.280
<v Speaker 3>Core or Weird House Cinema, send it our way contact

0:00:54.360 --> 0:00:57.960
<v Speaker 3>at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com. So today's

0:00:57.960 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 3>mail bag is still heavy with a bunch of older

0:01:00.320 --> 0:01:02.080
<v Speaker 3>messages we didn't have time to get to in our

0:01:02.160 --> 0:01:06.400
<v Speaker 3>last round up our October thirty eighth or whatever whenever

0:01:06.440 --> 0:01:10.000
<v Speaker 3>we did that, And we've got some new stuff, so

0:01:10.200 --> 0:01:12.800
<v Speaker 3>we'll see what we can make it through today, Rob,

0:01:12.840 --> 0:01:14.520
<v Speaker 3>do you mind if I kick things off reading this

0:01:14.600 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 3>message from Anita on a number of topics.

0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:18.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, go for it.

0:01:23.240 --> 0:01:26.840
<v Speaker 3>Anita says, I am truly sorry for this clumpy compendium

0:01:26.880 --> 0:01:29.800
<v Speaker 3>of communication. I've wanted to write in for a while,

0:01:30.240 --> 0:01:32.319
<v Speaker 3>but have been thinking I'd put it off until I

0:01:32.319 --> 0:01:34.160
<v Speaker 3>had something more to say. And then I had a

0:01:34.200 --> 0:01:37.400
<v Speaker 3>lot to say. So here goes. You guys are awesome.

0:01:37.560 --> 0:01:40.319
<v Speaker 3>Listening to you brings back warm memories of grad school

0:01:40.400 --> 0:01:43.480
<v Speaker 3>and listening to educated folks just shoot the breeze. So

0:01:43.560 --> 0:01:46.800
<v Speaker 3>many times while listening to the show, I think to myself, Yeah,

0:01:46.800 --> 0:01:49.600
<v Speaker 3>but what about and then you actually bring it up.

0:01:49.800 --> 0:01:52.360
<v Speaker 3>It's almost like you can hear me. You also give

0:01:52.440 --> 0:01:55.640
<v Speaker 3>so many good conversation starters. Thank you so much. Well,

0:01:55.680 --> 0:01:58.640
<v Speaker 3>thank you, Anita. That means a lot. But right after this,

0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:02.440
<v Speaker 3>she's going to bring out the hot iron about pronunciation. So,

0:02:02.960 --> 0:02:06.760
<v Speaker 3>Anita says, having gone to the University of Colorado, Boulder,

0:02:07.000 --> 0:02:09.960
<v Speaker 3>I can tell you that it is see you Boulder.

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:12.160
<v Speaker 3>I know, but that's the way we do it. I

0:02:12.160 --> 0:02:15.040
<v Speaker 3>think this is addressing every time we talk about somebody

0:02:15.040 --> 0:02:18.359
<v Speaker 3>affiliated with University of Colorado Boulder, I'm sure I call

0:02:18.400 --> 0:02:22.160
<v Speaker 3>it u CE Boulder, but yeah, U SEE tends to

0:02:23.280 --> 0:02:26.720
<v Speaker 3>relate to the University of California and not University of Colorado.

0:02:26.840 --> 0:02:29.600
<v Speaker 3>So I apologize for the hundreds of times I've probably

0:02:29.600 --> 0:02:29.960
<v Speaker 3>said that.

0:02:29.919 --> 0:02:34.639
<v Speaker 2>Wrong, igniting the you know, the fear sports rivalry between

0:02:34.800 --> 0:02:38.240
<v Speaker 2>whatever these two universities teams are go big horns.

0:02:39.120 --> 0:02:45.560
<v Speaker 3>I have no idea. Also, Anita says, having lived in Nevada,

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:49.200
<v Speaker 3>it is pronounced Nevada with an a, like an apple.

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:52.400
<v Speaker 3>Saying it the other way. I probably always say Nevada.

0:02:52.520 --> 0:02:54.600
<v Speaker 3>Saying it the other way is like nails on a

0:02:54.720 --> 0:02:58.960
<v Speaker 3>chalkboard to a Nevada. I know it's originally Spanish, but

0:02:59.120 --> 0:03:01.840
<v Speaker 3>it's American naw Okay.

0:03:02.080 --> 0:03:02.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah.

0:03:03.160 --> 0:03:06.359
<v Speaker 3>I feel like I mostly noticed this pronunciation when there

0:03:06.520 --> 0:03:10.960
<v Speaker 3>is national news coverage relating to elections where things are

0:03:10.960 --> 0:03:15.600
<v Speaker 3>happening in Nevada, and I can hear newscasters like pause

0:03:15.720 --> 0:03:17.960
<v Speaker 3>before they say the name of the state and then

0:03:18.040 --> 0:03:21.360
<v Speaker 3>say Nevada, as if they're having to remember to pronounce

0:03:21.360 --> 0:03:24.120
<v Speaker 3>it that way. So I don't know, maybe they're like me.

0:03:24.240 --> 0:03:27.280
<v Speaker 3>Maybe they said it the way I said it a

0:03:27.320 --> 0:03:30.960
<v Speaker 3>bunch of times. Anyway, The next thing is Anita says,

0:03:31.000 --> 0:03:33.800
<v Speaker 3>an article just came around from the Dane County Humane

0:03:33.840 --> 0:03:38.920
<v Speaker 3>Society about a squirrel king that was found. I live

0:03:39.040 --> 0:03:42.920
<v Speaker 3>just north of Madison, Wisconsin, in Lodi. I work in Madison,

0:03:42.960 --> 0:03:46.600
<v Speaker 3>which is in Dane County. So yeah, this relates to

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:50.000
<v Speaker 3>episodes we've done in the past on the rat king phenomenon.

0:03:50.400 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 3>We've addressed the extent to which this is a real

0:03:52.880 --> 0:03:57.360
<v Speaker 3>thing and not just made up. There's clearly a lot

0:03:57.400 --> 0:04:00.360
<v Speaker 3>of rat king mythology, but there is some bay in

0:04:00.400 --> 0:04:03.280
<v Speaker 3>reality as well. So I went to this article and

0:04:03.320 --> 0:04:05.720
<v Speaker 3>I pulled in some pictures and Rob, I've got at

0:04:05.800 --> 0:04:07.400
<v Speaker 3>least one of the photos for you to look at

0:04:07.440 --> 0:04:11.440
<v Speaker 3>in the outline here where we see several squirrels that

0:04:11.680 --> 0:04:14.920
<v Speaker 3>are you see the distinct squirrel bodies like the you know,

0:04:15.280 --> 0:04:18.920
<v Speaker 3>the the fan blades on a pinwheel. But then yes,

0:04:18.960 --> 0:04:21.560
<v Speaker 3>their tails come together in the middle in just a

0:04:21.720 --> 0:04:27.120
<v Speaker 3>mushy mass of gray brown fur leaves what looks like

0:04:27.160 --> 0:04:30.160
<v Speaker 3>some kind of plant fiber. It's just a mess in

0:04:30.200 --> 0:04:33.600
<v Speaker 3>the middle, and all the tails go in. So Anita

0:04:33.800 --> 0:04:36.160
<v Speaker 3>attaches a link to a news article from the Dane

0:04:36.160 --> 0:04:39.680
<v Speaker 3>County Humane Society by I think their director named Jackie

0:04:39.839 --> 0:04:43.279
<v Speaker 3>Edmonds from October twenty eighth, twenty twenty five. I'll read

0:04:43.320 --> 0:04:45.200
<v Speaker 3>from the opening to give you an idea of the story.

0:04:45.240 --> 0:04:49.080
<v Speaker 3>Here quote. On September seventeenth, twenty twenty five, a group

0:04:49.120 --> 0:04:52.279
<v Speaker 3>of five young Eastern gray squirrels were found with their

0:04:52.320 --> 0:04:55.960
<v Speaker 3>tails all knotted together in a phenomenon known as a

0:04:56.000 --> 0:05:00.640
<v Speaker 3>squirrel king. The finders, who were from Janesville, successful captured

0:05:00.640 --> 0:05:03.400
<v Speaker 3>the entire scurry, which is a real term for the

0:05:03.400 --> 0:05:06.680
<v Speaker 3>group scurry of squirrels, placed them in a bucket, and

0:05:06.760 --> 0:05:11.400
<v Speaker 3>brought them to Dcchs's Wildlife Center for an emergency admission appointment.

0:05:12.279 --> 0:05:16.320
<v Speaker 3>It was theorized that these babies snuggled together for warmth

0:05:16.360 --> 0:05:19.880
<v Speaker 3>and comfort inside of their cavity nest or dray a

0:05:19.960 --> 0:05:23.320
<v Speaker 3>leaf nest, and came into contact with tree sap while

0:05:23.360 --> 0:05:27.320
<v Speaker 3>they were growing. As the sap spread, it thickened and hardened,

0:05:27.480 --> 0:05:30.520
<v Speaker 3>and the squirrels continued to squirm around each other while

0:05:30.560 --> 0:05:33.360
<v Speaker 3>they got bigger. In doing so, the knot in their

0:05:33.400 --> 0:05:37.559
<v Speaker 3>tails worsened over time. So that's the beginning of the story,

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:39.800
<v Speaker 3>But then it goes on to describe lots of careful

0:05:39.839 --> 0:05:43.640
<v Speaker 3>rehabilitation efforts by workers and volunteers at the center, and

0:05:43.760 --> 0:05:46.320
<v Speaker 3>there are some pictures of that too, of the workers

0:05:46.320 --> 0:05:49.159
<v Speaker 3>carefully trying to take care of the squirrels to get

0:05:49.160 --> 0:05:54.680
<v Speaker 3>the the clumped up part removed, and finally at the

0:05:54.760 --> 0:05:57.320
<v Speaker 3>end they do get all the squirrels separated. And then

0:05:56.920 --> 0:06:02.320
<v Speaker 3>there's an update from November thirteenth, so just recently. The

0:06:02.760 --> 0:06:05.880
<v Speaker 3>article says, great news, the five squirrels that had comprised

0:06:05.880 --> 0:06:09.760
<v Speaker 3>the squirrel king were successfully rehabilitated and released on Tuesday,

0:06:09.800 --> 0:06:14.120
<v Speaker 3>November eleventh, so they're all separate now, and Edmunds says

0:06:14.200 --> 0:06:17.039
<v Speaker 3>quote after speaking with the finder, they were returned to

0:06:17.080 --> 0:06:19.640
<v Speaker 3>their property along with a nest box. The finder has

0:06:19.640 --> 0:06:22.480
<v Speaker 3>agreed to carefully supply food throughout the winter to help

0:06:22.520 --> 0:06:25.080
<v Speaker 3>the squirrels since they did not have time to collect

0:06:25.120 --> 0:06:26.040
<v Speaker 3>winter supplies.

0:06:27.320 --> 0:06:32.200
<v Speaker 2>That's a nice ending to that little story. Two takeaways here,

0:06:32.240 --> 0:06:35.640
<v Speaker 2>I think, one especially for our international listeners. Yes, in

0:06:35.640 --> 0:06:38.640
<v Speaker 2>this country you do get free healthcare if you are

0:06:38.680 --> 0:06:44.240
<v Speaker 2>a bundle of rodents. Humans not so much. And then

0:06:44.440 --> 0:06:48.960
<v Speaker 2>on top of that, the idea that this knot of rodents,

0:06:48.960 --> 0:06:53.320
<v Speaker 2>this knot of squirrels, was successfully untied and the squirrels

0:06:53.320 --> 0:06:57.000
<v Speaker 2>were saved. If the rat king, or in this case,

0:06:57.000 --> 0:07:01.800
<v Speaker 2>the squirrel king, is indeed a dire omen. Successfully solving

0:07:01.839 --> 0:07:05.760
<v Speaker 2>it in this manner would seem to be a way

0:07:04.680 --> 0:07:11.320
<v Speaker 2>to prevent disaster and prevent some sort of looming doom

0:07:12.000 --> 0:07:16.600
<v Speaker 2>from occurring. So I like the metaphysical possibilities of this

0:07:16.720 --> 0:07:17.160
<v Speaker 2>as well.

0:07:17.240 --> 0:07:20.280
<v Speaker 3>It's like knocking on wood or throwing salt over your shoulder.

0:07:20.320 --> 0:07:21.640
<v Speaker 3>You untangle the squirrel king.

0:07:21.720 --> 0:07:24.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, it's a lot more complicated. We tend to throw

0:07:24.320 --> 0:07:27.480
<v Speaker 2>the salt over our shoulder because it requires virtually no work,

0:07:27.640 --> 0:07:29.560
<v Speaker 2>and all you have to do is turn around and

0:07:29.600 --> 0:07:33.040
<v Speaker 2>make sure it lands in the sink. Right, Untangling the

0:07:33.080 --> 0:07:36.040
<v Speaker 2>squirrel king clearly took a lot more skill and expertise.

0:07:36.800 --> 0:07:39.520
<v Speaker 3>Anita has a little more in her message, she says,

0:07:39.600 --> 0:07:43.080
<v Speaker 3>And lastly, we have a certain metal filing cabinet here

0:07:43.120 --> 0:07:46.560
<v Speaker 3>at work that sounds like Godzilla. I think of you

0:07:46.640 --> 0:07:49.600
<v Speaker 3>two every time I need to get shipping labels. Sound

0:07:49.640 --> 0:07:52.640
<v Speaker 3>file attached. I guess we can play it here, But

0:07:52.720 --> 0:07:57.200
<v Speaker 3>warning listeners, it is squeally, so take note that it's coming.

0:08:02.280 --> 0:08:06.360
<v Speaker 3>I agree, it's quite kaijusque. There is a kind of squeal,

0:08:06.520 --> 0:08:10.960
<v Speaker 3>a radioactive squeal, echoing up into the stratosphere, so I

0:08:11.000 --> 0:08:12.920
<v Speaker 3>hear exactly what you're saying, and I may have actually

0:08:13.000 --> 0:08:15.880
<v Speaker 3>had that thought about squealing metal on metal sounds before.

0:08:16.040 --> 0:08:18.840
<v Speaker 3>It really does sound kind of like a giant monster.

0:08:18.960 --> 0:08:21.320
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you just need to drop the Godzilla theme song

0:08:21.400 --> 0:08:22.000
<v Speaker 2>on top of that.

0:08:22.400 --> 0:08:23.640
<v Speaker 3>Dun dun dun, dun dun.

0:08:23.680 --> 0:08:23.840
<v Speaker 2>Duh.

0:08:24.040 --> 0:08:27.400
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, and Anita finally says, glad, I got that out

0:08:27.440 --> 0:08:29.680
<v Speaker 3>of my system. Thanks for giving my brain things to

0:08:29.760 --> 0:08:33.520
<v Speaker 3>chew on. Joe's gentle snickering sounds, along with Rob's mums,

0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:35.880
<v Speaker 3>especially when he doesn't quite agree.

0:08:37.360 --> 0:08:39.920
<v Speaker 2>I need. I'd never really until I read this one

0:08:40.080 --> 0:08:42.040
<v Speaker 2>when it came in. I'd never really thought too much

0:08:42.040 --> 0:08:43.880
<v Speaker 2>about what my momms might be giving away.

0:08:44.040 --> 0:08:46.160
<v Speaker 3>But yeah, I don't know either. I guess I say

0:08:46.160 --> 0:08:48.560
<v Speaker 3>some moms too. I have to think on that.

0:08:49.360 --> 0:08:51.840
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, sometimes they just might have no particular opinion. I

0:08:51.880 --> 0:08:53.200
<v Speaker 2>might be very neutral. I don't know.

0:08:53.480 --> 0:08:56.000
<v Speaker 3>I'd say that's the most common time I would say,

0:08:56.160 --> 0:08:58.360
<v Speaker 3>MM is when I don't feel like I have an

0:08:58.360 --> 0:08:58.920
<v Speaker 3>opinion on.

0:08:58.880 --> 0:09:01.600
<v Speaker 2>Something unless it's a downward and then I might Yeah,

0:09:01.640 --> 0:09:03.160
<v Speaker 2>it might be Yeah, I don't know. I have to

0:09:03.200 --> 0:09:04.640
<v Speaker 2>listen back and see if I can figure out this.

0:09:04.720 --> 0:09:07.520
<v Speaker 2>Since I generally know where my mind probably was when

0:09:07.520 --> 0:09:10.760
<v Speaker 2>I uttered a given all right, what do we have

0:09:11.320 --> 0:09:13.480
<v Speaker 2>next in the bag? A number of these the listener

0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:15.719
<v Speaker 2>mails seem to be a little bit sticky.

0:09:15.840 --> 0:09:19.760
<v Speaker 3>That's right. So we're gonna do another episode on the

0:09:19.840 --> 0:09:23.160
<v Speaker 3>licking theme from before our break last week. We're going

0:09:23.200 --> 0:09:26.480
<v Speaker 3>to do another one later this week, and one listener

0:09:26.520 --> 0:09:29.560
<v Speaker 3>mail message on that subject actually inspired a segment for that.

0:09:29.679 --> 0:09:32.800
<v Speaker 3>So we'll talk about some listener mail in the Licking

0:09:32.840 --> 0:09:36.239
<v Speaker 3>Part three episode. But we got quite a few responses,

0:09:36.400 --> 0:09:39.400
<v Speaker 3>especially to the research on how many licks it takes

0:09:39.679 --> 0:09:41.560
<v Speaker 3>to get to the center of a Tutsi pop. This

0:09:41.720 --> 0:09:43.040
<v Speaker 3>really set people off.

0:09:44.760 --> 0:09:46.520
<v Speaker 2>That's right. All right. This first one comes to us

0:09:46.520 --> 0:09:56.560
<v Speaker 2>from Scott subject Tutsi Pop memories, gentlemen, I was transported

0:09:56.600 --> 0:09:58.760
<v Speaker 2>back to the days of my youth during the Licking

0:09:58.800 --> 0:10:02.560
<v Speaker 2>Part one episode the discussion of the Tutsi pop. I

0:10:02.600 --> 0:10:05.680
<v Speaker 2>distinctly remember sitting cross legged on the living room floor,

0:10:05.720 --> 0:10:08.600
<v Speaker 2>staring rapidly at the black and white television set as

0:10:08.640 --> 0:10:11.360
<v Speaker 2>the Tutsi Pop commercial came on, and the feeling of

0:10:11.400 --> 0:10:15.720
<v Speaker 2>amusement mixed with betrayal on behalf of the kid when

0:10:15.760 --> 0:10:19.600
<v Speaker 2>that smart ass owl stole, yes, stole his candy, wise

0:10:19.640 --> 0:10:22.600
<v Speaker 2>old owl, I think not Charlotte's, and I say thief

0:10:22.600 --> 0:10:26.520
<v Speaker 2>swindler in the guise of an authority figure ahem. Sorry

0:10:26.520 --> 0:10:30.160
<v Speaker 2>about that. Perhaps I have some unresolved childhood issues. To continue.

0:10:30.520 --> 0:10:32.880
<v Speaker 2>Your observation that the phrase how many licks to get

0:10:32.920 --> 0:10:35.439
<v Speaker 2>to the center of a tutsi pop may be paradoxical?

0:10:35.559 --> 0:10:38.400
<v Speaker 2>May be a paradoxical riddle to prove provoke enlightenment? Is

0:10:38.440 --> 0:10:41.480
<v Speaker 2>I believe accurate. There is no answer, partially because it

0:10:41.559 --> 0:10:44.800
<v Speaker 2>is a trick question. You see, nobody actually licks a

0:10:44.880 --> 0:10:48.200
<v Speaker 2>tutsi pop. One eats a tutsi pop by sticking the

0:10:48.360 --> 0:10:51.079
<v Speaker 2>entire thing in the mouth, where it is bathed in saliva,

0:10:51.160 --> 0:10:54.640
<v Speaker 2>causing it to dissolve. The act of licking involves sticking

0:10:54.640 --> 0:10:56.839
<v Speaker 2>the tongue out of the mouth to make contact with

0:10:56.880 --> 0:10:59.960
<v Speaker 2>the object. I've never heard of anyone doing that, aside

0:11:00.120 --> 0:11:02.920
<v Speaker 2>from the comically large novelty lollipops the size of a

0:11:03.000 --> 0:11:06.160
<v Speaker 2>child's head you get at circuses and county fairs.

0:11:06.480 --> 0:11:08.640
<v Speaker 3>This is a really good point. I don't think I

0:11:08.720 --> 0:11:11.400
<v Speaker 3>ever licked a lollipop when I was a kid. You

0:11:11.559 --> 0:11:13.839
<v Speaker 3>put I put it in my mouth and just passively

0:11:13.880 --> 0:11:16.360
<v Speaker 3>dissolved it. I feel like licking a lollipop is something

0:11:16.360 --> 0:11:17.440
<v Speaker 3>only oodor does.

0:11:18.360 --> 0:11:21.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I think the only time I might have done it,

0:11:21.280 --> 0:11:25.719
<v Speaker 2>or I've seen other kids doing you're probably consciously re

0:11:25.920 --> 0:11:28.880
<v Speaker 2>enacting something you saw in a cartoon. Yeah, but yes,

0:11:29.040 --> 0:11:31.320
<v Speaker 2>very good point. Yeah, you're generally you're putting it in

0:11:31.360 --> 0:11:33.559
<v Speaker 2>your mouth and it's just swirling it around and so forth,

0:11:34.160 --> 0:11:37.360
<v Speaker 2>in the same way that you don't lick any other

0:11:37.640 --> 0:11:40.400
<v Speaker 2>hard candy that's not on a stick. It just goes

0:11:40.440 --> 0:11:44.240
<v Speaker 2>in the mouth. Yeah. Anyway, they continue. You don't lick

0:11:44.280 --> 0:11:47.080
<v Speaker 2>at Tutsi pop, you suck on it. Indeed, where I

0:11:47.120 --> 0:11:50.840
<v Speaker 2>grew up in southwest Michigan, the common nay only name

0:11:51.200 --> 0:11:55.240
<v Speaker 2>used for Tutsi pops and their generic brethren was sucker.

0:11:55.840 --> 0:11:57.600
<v Speaker 3>Yep, I remember that too. When I was a kid,

0:11:57.640 --> 0:11:59.960
<v Speaker 3>they were suckers more than they were lollipop.

0:12:00.240 --> 0:12:02.959
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we didn't really say lollies because it's suckers. I

0:12:03.040 --> 0:12:05.440
<v Speaker 2>think I like the term lollies more if I was

0:12:05.480 --> 0:12:08.920
<v Speaker 2>to refer to them, but that's not what we call them.

0:12:09.600 --> 0:12:12.439
<v Speaker 2>Scott continues as far as the actual question of whether

0:12:12.480 --> 0:12:15.040
<v Speaker 2>one should or shouldn't crunch through the candy shell to

0:12:15.040 --> 0:12:16.719
<v Speaker 2>get to the center. I may be an outlier in

0:12:16.760 --> 0:12:19.439
<v Speaker 2>the population of Tutsi pop eaters. As long as I

0:12:19.480 --> 0:12:22.679
<v Speaker 2>can remember, I strove to avoid the crunch. My goal

0:12:22.920 --> 0:12:25.040
<v Speaker 2>was always to suck on the thing until the flavor

0:12:25.040 --> 0:12:28.079
<v Speaker 2>of the chocolate ciner mixed with the Erstot's fruit flavor

0:12:28.120 --> 0:12:31.640
<v Speaker 2>of the shell. Only then did I give myself permission

0:12:31.679 --> 0:12:34.800
<v Speaker 2>to finish it off in a few bites. Ah childhood.

0:12:34.840 --> 0:12:39.400
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for dredging up the memory from the vaults, Scott, Yes,

0:12:40.320 --> 0:12:43.120
<v Speaker 2>some great points here. I may have gone into this,

0:12:43.160 --> 0:12:45.840
<v Speaker 2>but I think I tended to avoid the crunch as well,

0:12:45.920 --> 0:12:49.920
<v Speaker 2>in part because I wasn't as crazy about the Tutsi

0:12:50.480 --> 0:12:56.439
<v Speaker 2>center and would rather the orange exterior last as long

0:12:56.480 --> 0:12:57.200
<v Speaker 2>as possible.

0:12:58.120 --> 0:13:01.079
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, there also seemed I don't know, when I was

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:06.080
<v Speaker 3>a kid, I don't think I liked trying to crunch

0:13:06.480 --> 0:13:10.360
<v Speaker 3>hard candy, like hard sugar candy. That seemed dangerous. Maybe

0:13:10.360 --> 0:13:13.600
<v Speaker 3>I was a nerdy overly cautious child, but that just

0:13:13.600 --> 0:13:15.440
<v Speaker 3>seemed like that could do something to your teeth.

0:13:17.160 --> 0:13:20.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and I do want to stress though, there are

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:22.199
<v Speaker 2>plenty of people out here who loved the combination of

0:13:22.200 --> 0:13:24.920
<v Speaker 2>the flavors. I just offhand. I ended up chatting with

0:13:25.640 --> 0:13:30.080
<v Speaker 2>some friends reminiscing about their experiences with Tutsi pops, and

0:13:30.400 --> 0:13:32.000
<v Speaker 2>more than one of them were like, oh, yeah, I

0:13:32.000 --> 0:13:34.400
<v Speaker 2>love the way that the two flavors came together. So

0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:36.560
<v Speaker 2>on one hand, I may be an outlier and that

0:13:36.679 --> 0:13:41.080
<v Speaker 2>I didn't really like the Tutsi Pop Center as much,

0:13:41.480 --> 0:13:44.160
<v Speaker 2>And or I could be misremembering it a bit. You know.

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:46.080
<v Speaker 2>It could be that I really actually loved it as

0:13:46.120 --> 0:13:47.880
<v Speaker 2>a kid, and I've just kind of paved over that

0:13:47.920 --> 0:13:49.160
<v Speaker 2>particular memory detail.

0:13:49.720 --> 0:13:52.880
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's funny how you think you can remember things

0:13:52.920 --> 0:13:55.040
<v Speaker 3>like this, but then sometimes the more you think about them,

0:13:55.080 --> 0:13:56.120
<v Speaker 3>the more you doubt at les.

0:13:56.160 --> 0:13:59.640
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, or you allow your adults views on things to

0:13:59.679 --> 0:14:03.160
<v Speaker 2>then the shape of your childhood memories, thinking like, oh,

0:14:03.200 --> 0:14:08.200
<v Speaker 2>I don't like Tutsi roles now, surely my childhood self

0:14:08.200 --> 0:14:11.560
<v Speaker 2>didn't like them either, But it's entirely possible that I did,

0:14:11.840 --> 0:14:12.199
<v Speaker 2>all right.

0:14:12.240 --> 0:14:14.560
<v Speaker 3>This next message is also about Tutsi pops. This is

0:14:14.559 --> 0:14:22.960
<v Speaker 3>from ian Ian, says dear Robin Joe, you asked for

0:14:23.040 --> 0:14:26.480
<v Speaker 3>personal Tutsi pop stories, I shall oblige as far as

0:14:26.560 --> 0:14:29.200
<v Speaker 3>eating them normally, I didn't lick them, per se, I

0:14:29.200 --> 0:14:31.280
<v Speaker 3>would suck on the whole thing in my mouth like

0:14:31.320 --> 0:14:34.760
<v Speaker 3>a sucker, and only once I tasted chocolate would I

0:14:34.800 --> 0:14:37.400
<v Speaker 3>bite through the very last thin layer of hard candy

0:14:37.440 --> 0:14:41.680
<v Speaker 3>coating to the core. The crunch was very satisfying. I

0:14:41.840 --> 0:14:45.640
<v Speaker 3>also did the licking experiment ones as I'm sure many

0:14:45.640 --> 0:14:49.080
<v Speaker 3>other children did. I sat down with a Tutsi pop

0:14:49.280 --> 0:14:52.080
<v Speaker 3>and a legal pad and made a tally mark every

0:14:52.120 --> 0:14:55.080
<v Speaker 3>time I licked it. I can't remember my technique other

0:14:55.240 --> 0:14:59.000
<v Speaker 3>than that I counted exposing any part of the chocolate

0:14:59.080 --> 0:15:01.640
<v Speaker 3>core as reached out the center. When all was said

0:15:01.680 --> 0:15:04.560
<v Speaker 3>and done, it took me six hundred and sixty six

0:15:04.680 --> 0:15:07.760
<v Speaker 3>licks to reach the center. Really, at the time, I

0:15:07.880 --> 0:15:11.640
<v Speaker 3>was unfamiliar with the satanic connotations of that number, and

0:15:11.680 --> 0:15:14.600
<v Speaker 3>now I wonder what the significance of my result is.

0:15:14.760 --> 0:15:17.800
<v Speaker 3>Perhaps Tootsi Pops are the candy of the devil. Thanks

0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:20.840
<v Speaker 3>for the show, Keep up the good work, ian Ian.

0:15:20.920 --> 0:15:22.760
<v Speaker 3>I'm going to trust you on that that you're not

0:15:22.840 --> 0:15:24.600
<v Speaker 3>just making that up because it's a good story.

0:15:26.200 --> 0:15:28.760
<v Speaker 2>Made up or not, I am going to assume it

0:15:28.800 --> 0:15:31.160
<v Speaker 2>is the correct answer. Now, six hundred and sixty six

0:15:31.240 --> 0:15:35.040
<v Speaker 2>licks seems appropriate and actually not that far off. From

0:15:35.120 --> 0:15:38.480
<v Speaker 2>I mean, we talked about the wide variety of numbers

0:15:38.480 --> 0:15:41.320
<v Speaker 2>that some of these actual studies resulted in, so it

0:15:42.280 --> 0:15:44.520
<v Speaker 2>seems possible that you could get six hundred and sixty

0:15:44.600 --> 0:15:45.720
<v Speaker 2>six totally.

0:15:46.600 --> 0:15:49.600
<v Speaker 3>In fact, I think the next message from Matt addresses

0:15:49.640 --> 0:15:52.120
<v Speaker 3>the question of the wide variety of results.

0:15:53.200 --> 0:15:55.600
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Matt says, Hey, guys, just wanted to jump in

0:15:55.680 --> 0:15:57.960
<v Speaker 2>with my own experience that might shed some light on

0:15:58.000 --> 0:16:00.120
<v Speaker 2>why that one study found a number of licks uch

0:16:00.200 --> 0:16:02.960
<v Speaker 2>higher than the others. For context, I was a weird

0:16:03.000 --> 0:16:06.000
<v Speaker 2>kid who had entertained himself with tedious projects like counting

0:16:06.000 --> 0:16:08.720
<v Speaker 2>to a thousand. I've also tried to count to one million,

0:16:08.760 --> 0:16:10.760
<v Speaker 2>but when I got to a few hundred, I realized

0:16:10.760 --> 0:16:14.080
<v Speaker 2>how long it was taking to even be one two

0:16:14.160 --> 0:16:16.760
<v Speaker 2>thousandth of the way to the goal, and gave up

0:16:16.760 --> 0:16:19.960
<v Speaker 2>on that one. In any case, I did undertake finding

0:16:20.000 --> 0:16:21.920
<v Speaker 2>the answer to how many licks does it take to

0:16:21.920 --> 0:16:23.640
<v Speaker 2>get to the center of a Tutsi pop? And I

0:16:23.680 --> 0:16:26.800
<v Speaker 2>got a similar number to the three thousand plus sided

0:16:26.840 --> 0:16:29.960
<v Speaker 2>in the one study. I think they, like myself, defined

0:16:30.000 --> 0:16:32.040
<v Speaker 2>to get to the center to me not only to

0:16:32.160 --> 0:16:34.840
<v Speaker 2>drill a hole that reached the center, but to completely

0:16:34.880 --> 0:16:38.080
<v Speaker 2>liberate the Tutsi roll from its hard candy prison. In

0:16:38.120 --> 0:16:39.920
<v Speaker 2>my mind, we were getting to the center in the

0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:42.680
<v Speaker 2>same way you were getting to a buried treasure. That is,

0:16:43.040 --> 0:16:45.960
<v Speaker 2>you haven't gotten it until you have got it all

0:16:46.040 --> 0:16:48.400
<v Speaker 2>the way out of the substance it's buried in.

0:16:48.800 --> 0:16:50.120
<v Speaker 3>Mmmm, that makes sense.

0:16:50.840 --> 0:16:53.760
<v Speaker 2>I also wondered, WHI while doing this, what kind of

0:16:53.840 --> 0:16:56.080
<v Speaker 2>lick should I be doing? A dainty lick with the

0:16:56.120 --> 0:16:58.200
<v Speaker 2>top of your tongue must take more licks than an

0:16:58.240 --> 0:17:02.200
<v Speaker 2>aggressive lick that envelops the entire pop after all. Anyways,

0:17:02.520 --> 0:17:03.760
<v Speaker 2>thought i'd share, man.

0:17:03.920 --> 0:17:09.159
<v Speaker 3>I think this really emphasizes how much exercise is actually involved,

0:17:09.240 --> 0:17:12.840
<v Speaker 3>Like how much work it would be to again lick

0:17:12.960 --> 0:17:16.720
<v Speaker 3>the entire Tutsi pop down instead of just yeah, passively

0:17:16.760 --> 0:17:20.320
<v Speaker 3>dissolving it inside your mouth. Like that's a lot of

0:17:20.359 --> 0:17:24.080
<v Speaker 3>work in the tongue muscle. Yeah, okay. This next message

0:17:24.080 --> 0:17:26.240
<v Speaker 3>is also a response to the licking episodes, but not

0:17:26.440 --> 0:17:30.000
<v Speaker 3>about the Tutsi pop. It's about when we were talking

0:17:30.040 --> 0:17:33.840
<v Speaker 3>about the licking of wounds and also about the idea

0:17:33.840 --> 0:17:37.320
<v Speaker 3>of licking one's own eye. Oh, Robin, I think this

0:17:37.440 --> 0:17:40.040
<v Speaker 3>was in the context of talking about lizards that can

0:17:40.080 --> 0:17:41.120
<v Speaker 3>lick their own eyes.

0:17:40.920 --> 0:17:44.000
<v Speaker 2>To clean, yes, particularly geckos, but.

0:17:43.920 --> 0:17:47.080
<v Speaker 3>We were discussing how you know, some animals might have

0:17:47.119 --> 0:17:51.000
<v Speaker 3>special adaptations for this, but in other cases, licking or

0:17:51.040 --> 0:17:54.359
<v Speaker 3>spitting in the eye obviously can transfer bacteria from one

0:17:54.480 --> 0:17:56.439
<v Speaker 3>place to the other, and the eye can be very

0:17:56.520 --> 0:18:00.360
<v Speaker 3>sensitive to certain kinds of infections, so you know, it's

0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:08.439
<v Speaker 3>something to be avoided if possible. Rachel says, Hi, guys,

0:18:08.520 --> 0:18:10.840
<v Speaker 3>I just listened to the episode about licking, and it

0:18:10.880 --> 0:18:14.000
<v Speaker 3>reminded me of the time one of my rabbits had

0:18:14.000 --> 0:18:17.720
<v Speaker 3>an eye infection and after finishing the course of medications,

0:18:17.760 --> 0:18:21.119
<v Speaker 3>the problem still persisted until I realized it was because

0:18:21.200 --> 0:18:24.960
<v Speaker 3>my other rabbit wouldn't stop licking his eye. As soon

0:18:25.000 --> 0:18:28.919
<v Speaker 3>as I separated them, the infection was resolved. Ugh, I

0:18:29.000 --> 0:18:31.440
<v Speaker 3>feel bad because my rabbit was just trying to help

0:18:31.480 --> 0:18:34.880
<v Speaker 3>the other one, but it was actually making it worse. Anyway,

0:18:35.119 --> 0:18:37.560
<v Speaker 3>love the podcast. I've been a long time listener.

0:18:38.200 --> 0:18:40.080
<v Speaker 2>Great detail, great story. I like it.

0:18:40.359 --> 0:18:42.960
<v Speaker 3>That is interesting. But one thing that I don't think

0:18:42.960 --> 0:18:45.760
<v Speaker 3>I read about rabbits in any of the research I

0:18:45.800 --> 0:18:48.280
<v Speaker 3>was looking at in communal wound looking. I'm not saying

0:18:48.280 --> 0:18:50.480
<v Speaker 3>they don't do it, but I don't know of any

0:18:50.520 --> 0:18:52.720
<v Speaker 3>evidence other than this email that they do. So I

0:18:52.800 --> 0:18:58.119
<v Speaker 3>wonder if rabbits regularly engage in group communal wound looking

0:18:58.200 --> 0:19:01.920
<v Speaker 3>to help each other decontain emanate wound areas, or otherwise

0:19:02.080 --> 0:19:04.720
<v Speaker 3>help each other heal, or if maybe there was just

0:19:04.880 --> 0:19:07.880
<v Speaker 3>you know, this one rabbit had a kind of idiosyncratic

0:19:07.920 --> 0:19:08.920
<v Speaker 3>taste for eyeball.

0:19:09.480 --> 0:19:12.359
<v Speaker 2>I remember it factoring into Watership Down a lot, oh

0:19:12.400 --> 0:19:14.640
<v Speaker 2>when they were treating wounds. Not enough to say that

0:19:14.640 --> 0:19:18.560
<v Speaker 2>that's that it should be the primary source in order

0:19:18.600 --> 0:19:21.240
<v Speaker 2>to answer this question, but that does bring back to

0:19:21.320 --> 0:19:24.120
<v Speaker 2>my mind a number of scenes in which the rabbits

0:19:24.119 --> 0:19:27.280
<v Speaker 2>in that story that that work of fiction are tending

0:19:27.320 --> 0:19:28.280
<v Speaker 2>to each other's wounds.

0:19:28.400 --> 0:19:31.080
<v Speaker 3>Oh okay, well, then I would bet that's probably based

0:19:31.080 --> 0:19:33.680
<v Speaker 3>on something in reality. So yeah, I guess they probably

0:19:33.720 --> 0:19:34.960
<v Speaker 3>do it all right.

0:19:35.480 --> 0:19:39.200
<v Speaker 2>This next one, I don't even precisely remember the call

0:19:39.240 --> 0:19:42.919
<v Speaker 2>out for this, but I still greatly appreciate the answer.

0:19:48.480 --> 0:19:51.480
<v Speaker 2>Skyler sent us a message with the subject line giant

0:19:51.480 --> 0:19:57.040
<v Speaker 2>pilgrim skeleton in neighbor's yard from mid November. And indeed

0:19:57.119 --> 0:19:59.680
<v Speaker 2>it is one of these giant skeletons like we've seen

0:19:59.680 --> 0:20:03.840
<v Speaker 2>pop up in yards in recent years. And this one

0:20:04.960 --> 0:20:09.440
<v Speaker 2>has been decorated to look like a Pilgrim for Thanksgiving,

0:20:09.480 --> 0:20:13.760
<v Speaker 2>for American Thanksgiving apparently, which I think is wonderful. Hey,

0:20:13.800 --> 0:20:16.080
<v Speaker 2>I think these I love that these skeletons are staying

0:20:16.160 --> 0:20:20.200
<v Speaker 2>up year round and are getting different seasonal costumes. And also,

0:20:20.280 --> 0:20:24.040
<v Speaker 2>I mean, if you're gonna go with Pilgrim decorations nowadays,

0:20:24.080 --> 0:20:26.480
<v Speaker 2>I feel like scary Pilgrim is the way to go.

0:20:26.920 --> 0:20:31.240
<v Speaker 2>Scary skeletal, undead Pilgrim a plus in my book.

0:20:31.760 --> 0:20:35.439
<v Speaker 3>Now there's also an update that Skylar sent us after

0:20:35.600 --> 0:20:40.800
<v Speaker 3>the first message that came on November twentieth, so so this,

0:20:41.040 --> 0:20:44.880
<v Speaker 3>I guess was several days later they like completed the look.

0:20:44.960 --> 0:20:48.399
<v Speaker 3>So it started just giant skeleton with a Pilgrim upper

0:20:48.400 --> 0:20:52.359
<v Speaker 3>body costume. They added a skeleton dog, the kind with

0:20:52.480 --> 0:20:55.600
<v Speaker 3>ears and dogs don't have the bones in their ear,

0:20:55.720 --> 0:20:57.680
<v Speaker 3>but you know, so that you know it's a dog.

0:20:57.760 --> 0:20:59.960
<v Speaker 3>So there's skeleton dog right next to it. Okay, it's

0:21:00.040 --> 0:21:04.080
<v Speaker 3>got a puppy. And then also Pilgrim hat. And also, Rob,

0:21:04.119 --> 0:21:07.320
<v Speaker 3>did you notice this little detail eyeballs in the skull.

0:21:07.359 --> 0:21:09.480
<v Speaker 3>I didn't see them in the first picture. Maybe they're

0:21:09.560 --> 0:21:12.119
<v Speaker 3>hiding back there sort of. But doesn't look like it

0:21:12.160 --> 0:21:14.359
<v Speaker 3>to me. It looks like somebody went in there and

0:21:14.600 --> 0:21:17.240
<v Speaker 3>updated the skull with freaky eyeballs.

0:21:17.560 --> 0:21:20.960
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I think this is. This also nicely illustrates

0:21:21.000 --> 0:21:24.800
<v Speaker 2>the realization that one steadily gets leaving Halloween and realizing

0:21:24.800 --> 0:21:29.760
<v Speaker 2>that Thanksgiving is about to occur. The Pilgrim costume, the

0:21:29.920 --> 0:21:34.800
<v Speaker 2>the insane eyes of the dog specter. Yeah, it all tracks.

0:21:35.119 --> 0:21:38.080
<v Speaker 3>Big old buckle on the hat. What's that buckle for?

0:21:39.520 --> 0:21:40.879
<v Speaker 3>I guess it holds the hat together.

0:21:41.240 --> 0:21:44.280
<v Speaker 2>It's like it keeps the brain chaste, right, because that's

0:21:44.440 --> 0:21:44.840
<v Speaker 2>the reason.

0:21:46.200 --> 0:21:48.840
<v Speaker 3>It's a chastity belt for the crown of the skull.

0:21:49.040 --> 0:21:51.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, for the mind. Yeah, your thoughts only.

0:22:00.800 --> 0:22:03.320
<v Speaker 3>Okay, Rob, let's see what do you think about digging

0:22:03.359 --> 0:22:07.000
<v Speaker 3>into some of the messages left over from the previous

0:22:07.040 --> 0:22:09.919
<v Speaker 3>episode's mailbag. Some of these older ones from September. We

0:22:10.000 --> 0:22:12.320
<v Speaker 3>have a bunch of responses to our episodes from Star

0:22:12.359 --> 0:22:12.960
<v Speaker 3>Trek week.

0:22:13.280 --> 0:22:15.239
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, engage all right.

0:22:15.320 --> 0:22:18.119
<v Speaker 3>This message comes from Ian. It is about our episode

0:22:18.240 --> 0:22:22.960
<v Speaker 3>on transporters in Star Trek and teleportation paradoxes. Ian says,

0:22:23.240 --> 0:22:25.840
<v Speaker 3>just finished your episode on Star Trek Transporters and wanted

0:22:25.840 --> 0:22:27.600
<v Speaker 3>to write in with a few thoughts that you might

0:22:27.640 --> 0:22:32.439
<v Speaker 3>find interesting. Your discussion about transporter accidents had me thinking

0:22:32.440 --> 0:22:37.000
<v Speaker 3>about ian Embank's Culture civilization and how its approach differs

0:22:37.080 --> 0:22:41.359
<v Speaker 3>drastically from the Federation. Where the Federation is roughly a

0:22:41.440 --> 0:22:46.400
<v Speaker 3>Kardashev level one point five civilization, the culture is more

0:22:46.440 --> 0:22:49.159
<v Speaker 3>around a two point five, and though they do have

0:22:49.240 --> 0:22:53.600
<v Speaker 3>transporter technology in the ultra safe culture civilization, the one

0:22:53.760 --> 0:22:57.560
<v Speaker 3>in several billion chants of a teleportation accident is considered

0:22:57.640 --> 0:23:01.159
<v Speaker 3>far too dangerous to use unconscious being, so it is

0:23:01.240 --> 0:23:06.160
<v Speaker 3>restricted purely for cargo transport outside of extreme situations such

0:23:06.160 --> 0:23:10.240
<v Speaker 3>as emergencies or military operations. I found this to be

0:23:10.359 --> 0:23:12.880
<v Speaker 3>an interesting and subtle extension of the way our own

0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:16.679
<v Speaker 3>society's perception of acceptable risks changes as we're able to

0:23:16.720 --> 0:23:19.280
<v Speaker 3>mitigate more and more dangers that in the past would

0:23:19.280 --> 0:23:21.840
<v Speaker 3>have been considered just an everyday part of life.

0:23:21.960 --> 0:23:26.359
<v Speaker 2>This is a great point and something I've either I

0:23:26.480 --> 0:23:29.359
<v Speaker 2>forgot about it from the culture books that I've read,

0:23:29.480 --> 0:23:32.320
<v Speaker 2>or maybe it wasn't stressed as much in the particular

0:23:32.720 --> 0:23:36.119
<v Speaker 2>culture novels that I have read in the past. But

0:23:36.600 --> 0:23:38.720
<v Speaker 2>a great point and very much on, very much in

0:23:38.800 --> 0:23:43.000
<v Speaker 2>keeping with the culture. The culture. If anyone out there

0:23:43.040 --> 0:23:45.720
<v Speaker 2>isn't aware, or you haven't read Ian in Banks, or

0:23:45.720 --> 0:23:48.080
<v Speaker 2>you haven't heard me talk about it on the show

0:23:48.119 --> 0:23:51.400
<v Speaker 2>in a while, Scottish Authory and in Banks, the late

0:23:51.440 --> 0:23:58.119
<v Speaker 2>great In Banks envisioned this far future vision of humanity

0:23:58.240 --> 0:24:02.040
<v Speaker 2>and various alien species in which the culture is a

0:24:02.080 --> 0:24:10.520
<v Speaker 2>post scarcity anarchist utopia, and so it's it's such an interesting,

0:24:10.680 --> 0:24:15.040
<v Speaker 2>thought provoking and I think ultimately, you know, optimistic vision

0:24:15.080 --> 0:24:18.600
<v Speaker 2>of the future in the same way that Star Trek is,

0:24:19.040 --> 0:24:22.160
<v Speaker 2>but with its own distinctive flavors. You know, certainly getting

0:24:22.160 --> 0:24:27.879
<v Speaker 2>into some difficult problems, you know, philosophically, politically and so forth,

0:24:28.480 --> 0:24:31.119
<v Speaker 2>but at the root, you know, having this vision of

0:24:31.200 --> 0:24:36.399
<v Speaker 2>a far future society in which human beings enjoy a

0:24:36.440 --> 0:24:39.920
<v Speaker 2>great deal of freedom and equality. So if you find

0:24:39.960 --> 0:24:43.800
<v Speaker 2>yourself needing a vision like that in the year twenty

0:24:43.800 --> 0:24:47.200
<v Speaker 2>twenty five, or certainly in twenty twenty six, yeah, there's

0:24:47.240 --> 0:24:49.840
<v Speaker 2>never a better time to pick up one of Ian M.

0:24:49.880 --> 0:24:50.879
<v Speaker 2>Banks culture novels.

0:24:50.880 --> 0:24:53.320
<v Speaker 3>In my opinion, I have not read these books, but

0:24:53.920 --> 0:24:56.920
<v Speaker 3>from what I remember, they have a very positive vision

0:24:56.960 --> 0:25:00.359
<v Speaker 3>of the ultimate sort of integration of artificial intelligence into

0:25:00.520 --> 0:25:02.600
<v Speaker 3>into human biological life.

0:25:03.080 --> 0:25:05.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. But at the same time there, I mean, there's

0:25:05.960 --> 0:25:08.879
<v Speaker 2>there's one novel in particular that gets into like the

0:25:09.000 --> 0:25:13.800
<v Speaker 2>dangers of artificial intelligence and self replicating machines and so forth,

0:25:13.880 --> 0:25:17.280
<v Speaker 2>So you know, it's it's not one hundred percent you know,

0:25:17.840 --> 0:25:23.360
<v Speaker 2>techno optimist in that regard. Again, very very thought provoking

0:25:23.440 --> 0:25:27.480
<v Speaker 2>works that take these various problems and potential problems seriously,

0:25:27.640 --> 0:25:32.240
<v Speaker 2>from from self replicating machines to you know, theologies of

0:25:32.280 --> 0:25:34.480
<v Speaker 2>hell and virtual realms and so forth.

0:25:35.480 --> 0:25:36.840
<v Speaker 3>One of these days I'll have to get around to

0:25:36.880 --> 0:25:39.000
<v Speaker 3>reading them. And You've been talking about them for years

0:25:39.000 --> 0:25:41.320
<v Speaker 3>and I've been meaning to. I know, Ian and Banks

0:25:41.400 --> 0:25:44.640
<v Speaker 3>is greatly revered by many people whose taste I share.

0:25:44.720 --> 0:25:45.240
<v Speaker 3>I think.

0:25:46.640 --> 0:25:46.760
<v Speaker 2>So.

0:25:47.320 --> 0:25:52.400
<v Speaker 3>But getting back to Ian, I guess coincidence the name

0:25:52.440 --> 0:25:58.040
<v Speaker 3>here different spilm yes Ian's email. Ian says when discussing

0:25:58.080 --> 0:26:02.000
<v Speaker 3>the episode Star Trek episode Second Chances, in which Reiker

0:26:02.119 --> 0:26:05.679
<v Speaker 3>is duplicated, you briefly discuss the idea of meeting another

0:26:05.840 --> 0:26:09.360
<v Speaker 3>version of yourself who has had different experiences, and how

0:26:09.400 --> 0:26:12.359
<v Speaker 3>you may or may not even like that person. That

0:26:12.520 --> 0:26:16.159
<v Speaker 3>idea is explored quite in depth in a recent video game,

0:26:16.320 --> 0:26:20.480
<v Speaker 3>The Altars though not involving teleportation. The Altars involves a

0:26:20.560 --> 0:26:24.600
<v Speaker 3>loan technician stranded on a hostile alien planet who uses

0:26:24.600 --> 0:26:28.040
<v Speaker 3>a quantum scanning device to create alternate versions of himself

0:26:28.400 --> 0:26:31.199
<v Speaker 3>to help man the ship and escape the planet. The

0:26:31.240 --> 0:26:33.760
<v Speaker 3>device allows him to see all of the different critical

0:26:33.800 --> 0:26:36.280
<v Speaker 3>moments in his life that send him down different paths

0:26:36.359 --> 0:26:39.240
<v Speaker 3>and generate a version of himself who made the other choice.

0:26:39.400 --> 0:26:42.960
<v Speaker 3>So the ship's reactors broken, quantum duplicate the version of

0:26:43.000 --> 0:26:46.640
<v Speaker 3>yourself who became an engineer. Someone have an injury, simply

0:26:46.680 --> 0:26:49.119
<v Speaker 3>summon the version of yourself who went to medical school.

0:26:49.600 --> 0:26:52.960
<v Speaker 3>Each version has a different personality, outlook on life, etc.

0:26:53.600 --> 0:26:56.760
<v Speaker 3>Many don't like each other, and managing the interactions between

0:26:56.800 --> 0:26:59.600
<v Speaker 3>them is critical to surviving. It's a really interesting game

0:27:00.040 --> 0:27:01.040
<v Speaker 3>that does sound interesting.

0:27:02.040 --> 0:27:04.199
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I wasn't this one flu under my radar. I

0:27:04.200 --> 0:27:06.720
<v Speaker 2>had to look it up and it sounds fascinating from

0:27:06.760 --> 0:27:09.760
<v Speaker 2>the developers, I believe of frost Punk, which I was

0:27:09.800 --> 0:27:11.080
<v Speaker 2>familiar with by reputation.

0:27:11.760 --> 0:27:16.440
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I never played it. Ian says, finally, my last

0:27:16.440 --> 0:27:19.119
<v Speaker 3>thought is actually related to Star Trek. At the end

0:27:19.160 --> 0:27:21.520
<v Speaker 3>of the episode, Joe was musing about different ways the

0:27:21.520 --> 0:27:25.080
<v Speaker 3>transporter could be used for medical treatment since it can

0:27:25.200 --> 0:27:29.920
<v Speaker 3>filter out problematic infectious agents and the like. Uh yeah,

0:27:29.720 --> 0:27:32.720
<v Speaker 3>The question was like, if it turns you into information

0:27:33.000 --> 0:27:37.320
<v Speaker 3>and then decodes you back into matter, could you basically

0:27:37.480 --> 0:27:41.639
<v Speaker 3>turn medical problems into information debugging problems? You know, you

0:27:41.840 --> 0:27:46.800
<v Speaker 3>just like edit the code basically and then spit out

0:27:46.800 --> 0:27:50.200
<v Speaker 3>the healthy version. Ian says, as I recall, there are

0:27:50.240 --> 0:27:53.720
<v Speaker 3>several episodes of the various Trek series where the crew

0:27:53.800 --> 0:27:56.399
<v Speaker 3>does things like that, but the one that immediately sprang

0:27:56.440 --> 0:27:59.439
<v Speaker 3>to mind was an episode of Voyager, which begins with

0:27:59.520 --> 0:28:02.840
<v Speaker 3>the doctor assisting a woman in labor when things begin

0:28:02.920 --> 0:28:05.960
<v Speaker 3>to go wrong, and then he says, we're going to

0:28:06.000 --> 0:28:09.360
<v Speaker 3>have to perform an emergency C section, then walks purposefully

0:28:09.400 --> 0:28:12.760
<v Speaker 3>across the room to a computer console, where he proceeds

0:28:12.800 --> 0:28:15.199
<v Speaker 3>to beam the baby out of the mother's body and

0:28:15.280 --> 0:28:18.520
<v Speaker 3>directly into an incubator a few feet away, saving the day.

0:28:19.040 --> 0:28:21.879
<v Speaker 3>It's an amusingly anti climactic ending to a scene that

0:28:22.000 --> 0:28:24.560
<v Speaker 3>up to that point had been presented as if part

0:28:24.600 --> 0:28:28.520
<v Speaker 3>of a tense medical drama. Anyway, I know I've run long,

0:28:28.600 --> 0:28:30.520
<v Speaker 3>so I promise I won't be offended if you edit

0:28:30.560 --> 0:28:33.000
<v Speaker 3>any of this out. Well, we did not, I guess

0:28:33.000 --> 0:28:35.320
<v Speaker 3>apart from a few line edits. Please keep up the

0:28:35.320 --> 0:28:38.440
<v Speaker 3>good work, look forward to each episode. Ian, Thank you.

0:28:38.480 --> 0:28:41.960
<v Speaker 2>Ian. Yeah, yeah, great point. I have not really seen

0:28:42.000 --> 0:28:44.600
<v Speaker 2>any Voyager and this episode did not come up in

0:28:44.680 --> 0:28:48.720
<v Speaker 2>my research for that episode. So that's a great one

0:28:48.720 --> 0:28:51.239
<v Speaker 2>to share, all right. This next one comes to us

0:28:51.240 --> 0:28:58.720
<v Speaker 2>from Scott. Scott says, Hi, Joe and Rob. I am

0:28:58.720 --> 0:29:01.120
<v Speaker 2>a philosopher who also loves Star Trek and hence have

0:29:01.240 --> 0:29:06.960
<v Speaker 2>much familiarity with the philosophical debates around personal identity and transporters.

0:29:07.320 --> 0:29:09.600
<v Speaker 2>They actually led me to wonder if the history of

0:29:09.640 --> 0:29:12.479
<v Speaker 2>these debates would have been different if Gene Roddenberry had

0:29:12.520 --> 0:29:16.800
<v Speaker 2>explained the transporter differently as simply moving bodies intact through

0:29:16.840 --> 0:29:20.360
<v Speaker 2>some kind of temporary wormhole or tunnel. Actually, the idea

0:29:20.400 --> 0:29:23.320
<v Speaker 2>of scrambling and reassembling doesn't make much sense, as it

0:29:23.360 --> 0:29:27.120
<v Speaker 2>requires extra work on top of the assumption that we

0:29:27.440 --> 0:29:31.240
<v Speaker 2>can transmit some matter or energy instantaneously, and it seems

0:29:31.280 --> 0:29:34.240
<v Speaker 2>especially strange that this can be done without any mechanism

0:29:34.360 --> 0:29:37.360
<v Speaker 2>at the remote end. I compare this to the mantra

0:29:37.480 --> 0:29:41.040
<v Speaker 2>often given by cognitive scientists that quote, the best model

0:29:41.040 --> 0:29:44.320
<v Speaker 2>of the world is the world itself, explaining why we

0:29:44.440 --> 0:29:47.280
<v Speaker 2>don't have perfect memories of everything in the world, but

0:29:47.360 --> 0:29:51.720
<v Speaker 2>often rely on imperfect ones, which then allow continual updating

0:29:51.760 --> 0:29:55.080
<v Speaker 2>from the world itself so we can navigate it. Likewise,

0:29:55.120 --> 0:29:57.600
<v Speaker 2>the best model of the complex arrangements of the atoms

0:29:57.600 --> 0:30:00.440
<v Speaker 2>in our body is the body itself. Why not just

0:30:00.520 --> 0:30:04.400
<v Speaker 2>transmit this as a piece. Perhaps the idea was that,

0:30:04.480 --> 0:30:09.080
<v Speaker 2>given current physics, could we can transmit energy faster than matter.

0:30:09.520 --> 0:30:12.040
<v Speaker 2>But since the whole premise of Star Trek assumes a

0:30:12.080 --> 0:30:16.400
<v Speaker 2>warp drive which can move matter faster than light, going

0:30:16.440 --> 0:30:19.600
<v Speaker 2>well beyond current physics, I don't see why an instantaneous

0:30:19.600 --> 0:30:24.080
<v Speaker 2>conduit for matter over shorter distances couldn't have seemed just

0:30:24.120 --> 0:30:27.920
<v Speaker 2>as plausible. Indeed, the idea of reassembling atoms is so

0:30:28.040 --> 0:30:31.280
<v Speaker 2>implausible that I wonder if it would have ever occurred

0:30:31.320 --> 0:30:35.280
<v Speaker 2>to someone as a philosophical problem about whether the reassembled

0:30:35.320 --> 0:30:38.520
<v Speaker 2>person was identical to the dismantled one, if it hadn't

0:30:38.560 --> 0:30:43.040
<v Speaker 2>already been introduced as a possibly unnecessary science fiction plot device.

0:30:43.440 --> 0:30:46.440
<v Speaker 3>Scott, that's a good question. Would you even have people

0:30:46.640 --> 0:30:51.360
<v Speaker 3>in philosophy departments proposing, you know, questions about the swamp

0:30:51.440 --> 0:30:55.200
<v Speaker 3>man type scenario if there had never been a science

0:30:55.200 --> 0:30:59.160
<v Speaker 3>fiction idea of teleportation by these sorts of means.

0:30:59.600 --> 0:31:02.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, I mean it's interesting if you think of

0:31:02.120 --> 0:31:05.840
<v Speaker 2>it as a potential flaw. Maybe not a plot hole,

0:31:05.880 --> 0:31:08.880
<v Speaker 2>but maybe some sort of a flaw. It's been such

0:31:08.880 --> 0:31:11.479
<v Speaker 2>a thought provoking flaw, you know. Sometimes it is the

0:31:12.320 --> 0:31:17.520
<v Speaker 2>it's the wrinkles, it's the imperfections in a work that

0:31:17.800 --> 0:31:20.960
<v Speaker 2>fascinate us the most. Not that I'm saying that I

0:31:20.960 --> 0:31:24.040
<v Speaker 2>think this model of teleportation is a flaw in the

0:31:24.080 --> 0:31:28.120
<v Speaker 2>Star Trek franchise. Again, I think it's something that keeps

0:31:28.160 --> 0:31:30.160
<v Speaker 2>my mind tumbling over and over.

0:31:30.680 --> 0:31:34.280
<v Speaker 3>Okay. This next message comes from Eric. It has the

0:31:34.320 --> 0:31:38.200
<v Speaker 3>subject line Transporters and Consciousness. Hi, Robin Joe, thank you

0:31:38.200 --> 0:31:41.880
<v Speaker 3>for your fun and lighthearted exploration of teleportation from Star Trek.

0:31:42.080 --> 0:31:45.560
<v Speaker 3>As a moderate Trek fan, I enjoyed your coverage of

0:31:45.680 --> 0:31:49.840
<v Speaker 3>the topic. You mentioned the Next Generation episode Rascals from

0:31:49.880 --> 0:31:53.120
<v Speaker 3>season six. I don't remember what we said about that,

0:31:53.280 --> 0:31:55.840
<v Speaker 3>rob Wait, is that the one where they're like the

0:31:55.880 --> 0:31:57.680
<v Speaker 3>transporter turns them into children?

0:31:58.040 --> 0:32:00.760
<v Speaker 2>Yes? Okay, And if I remember, we kind of just

0:32:01.200 --> 0:32:03.360
<v Speaker 2>mention it in passing and I made I think I

0:32:03.400 --> 0:32:06.120
<v Speaker 2>made a comment where I didn't necessarily recognize who all

0:32:06.120 --> 0:32:08.640
<v Speaker 2>the characters were that had been transformed into children.

0:32:08.760 --> 0:32:12.120
<v Speaker 3>Okay, okay, so Eric says. A minor clarification is that

0:32:12.200 --> 0:32:17.520
<v Speaker 3>the fourth character who was childified was Kiko O'Brien. Am

0:32:17.520 --> 0:32:19.920
<v Speaker 3>I saying that right? I think so Okay played by

0:32:20.000 --> 0:32:24.080
<v Speaker 3>Rosalind Chow, the wife of Chief Miles O'Brien played by

0:32:24.120 --> 0:32:28.640
<v Speaker 3>Cole Meanie. They are frequent guest characters in the Next Generation,

0:32:29.040 --> 0:32:31.920
<v Speaker 3>and Miles in particular is a regular character on Deep

0:32:31.920 --> 0:32:35.560
<v Speaker 3>Space nine. Miles, as a working class petty officer, often

0:32:35.600 --> 0:32:37.760
<v Speaker 3>acts as a good foil for the more staid and

0:32:37.840 --> 0:32:42.120
<v Speaker 3>intellectual officers of the Enterprise, and this episode is a

0:32:42.120 --> 0:32:45.240
<v Speaker 3>good example. He has a very difficult time processing the

0:32:45.280 --> 0:32:48.560
<v Speaker 3>fact that this little girl is actually his wife and

0:32:48.640 --> 0:32:50.880
<v Speaker 3>keeps trying to take care of her like a child.

0:32:51.240 --> 0:32:55.080
<v Speaker 3>He's well intentioned, but emotionally clumsy. The O'Brien's aren't really

0:32:55.160 --> 0:32:58.600
<v Speaker 3>thinking about the philosophical implications or even the long term

0:32:58.720 --> 0:33:02.360
<v Speaker 3>ramifications the other crew members are. They're just trying to

0:33:02.400 --> 0:33:05.160
<v Speaker 3>get through the day as a family. While I wouldn't

0:33:05.160 --> 0:33:08.080
<v Speaker 3>hold the episode up as a Next Generation must see,

0:33:08.120 --> 0:33:11.560
<v Speaker 3>I think this subplot is very endearing and relatable. Thanks

0:33:11.600 --> 0:33:14.000
<v Speaker 3>again for a great episode and for a fun week

0:33:14.440 --> 0:33:18.400
<v Speaker 3>in tribute to Trek. Eric. Thanks Eric. Yeah, that's a

0:33:18.400 --> 0:33:21.800
<v Speaker 3>whole other philosophical question, like how do you deal with

0:33:21.960 --> 0:33:24.680
<v Speaker 3>an adult who suddenly transformed into a child.

0:33:24.840 --> 0:33:25.240
<v Speaker 2>I don't know.

0:33:25.320 --> 0:33:27.520
<v Speaker 3>I wouldn't want to imagine what would be needed to

0:33:27.560 --> 0:33:29.720
<v Speaker 3>take care of me if I were suddenly five again.

0:33:32.160 --> 0:33:36.400
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, yeah, this is a yeah. I appreciate getting more

0:33:36.840 --> 0:33:39.239
<v Speaker 2>info on this episode, which is probably one that I

0:33:39.280 --> 0:33:43.720
<v Speaker 2>only watched once back in the day in syndication. You know,

0:33:44.000 --> 0:33:47.280
<v Speaker 2>of course, watching these shows in syndication, you didn't really

0:33:47.280 --> 0:33:49.560
<v Speaker 2>have the liberty of picking out the best episodes or

0:33:49.960 --> 0:33:54.120
<v Speaker 2>or knowing what are the strong episodes and overarching episodes

0:33:54.160 --> 0:33:56.000
<v Speaker 2>that I need to watch. In my Star Trek the

0:33:56.040 --> 0:33:58.720
<v Speaker 2>Next Generation Journey, now, it was just whatever was on

0:33:58.840 --> 0:34:01.160
<v Speaker 2>at like nine pm. That was the Star Trek you

0:34:01.200 --> 0:34:01.680
<v Speaker 2>were watching.

0:34:02.320 --> 0:34:05.680
<v Speaker 3>I'm actually sitting here getting like ashamed and mortified, thinking

0:34:05.720 --> 0:34:08.680
<v Speaker 3>like if I were suddenly transformed into my daughter's age,

0:34:08.680 --> 0:34:10.560
<v Speaker 3>would I play nicely with her? Or would I not

0:34:10.640 --> 0:34:13.439
<v Speaker 3>be sharing my toys? What if I was a really

0:34:13.560 --> 0:34:16.680
<v Speaker 3>rotten little toddler and I was like not sharing and

0:34:16.719 --> 0:34:19.000
<v Speaker 3>being mean, it's horrifying me.

0:34:19.239 --> 0:34:21.440
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I mean it's a thought provoking question too, because

0:34:21.440 --> 0:34:25.560
<v Speaker 2>we've seen shows like this where the adult brain, the

0:34:25.600 --> 0:34:28.440
<v Speaker 2>adult is transformed into a child, but they retain the

0:34:29.239 --> 0:34:32.160
<v Speaker 2>mind of an adult. But would that be the case?

0:34:32.320 --> 0:34:36.200
<v Speaker 2>Like how much of childhood? I mean, how do you

0:34:36.200 --> 0:34:39.480
<v Speaker 2>separate the tube? You know, would you? And then what

0:34:39.480 --> 0:34:43.000
<v Speaker 2>would it be like to then be a child with

0:34:43.040 --> 0:34:46.719
<v Speaker 2>a child's brain, but with perhaps the memories of an adult, Like,

0:34:46.880 --> 0:34:48.680
<v Speaker 2>I don't know, it's very complicate. It's kind of the

0:34:48.880 --> 0:34:52.360
<v Speaker 2>Tutsi pop scenario. Yeah, Like there's a simple version of

0:34:52.400 --> 0:34:54.640
<v Speaker 2>imagining it, but the more questions you ask about it,

0:34:54.680 --> 0:34:56.000
<v Speaker 2>the more complicated it becomes.

0:34:56.480 --> 0:34:59.759
<v Speaker 3>Fortunately, transporter incidents of this kind are very rare, so

0:35:00.360 --> 0:35:02.200
<v Speaker 3>we don't have to worry about this for the most part.

0:35:03.560 --> 0:35:05.440
<v Speaker 2>Though it is again it's just the things I love

0:35:05.480 --> 0:35:08.160
<v Speaker 2>about the transporters in Star Trek is like this. The

0:35:08.200 --> 0:35:12.080
<v Speaker 2>list of potential side effects are just wild. You might

0:35:12.120 --> 0:35:14.319
<v Speaker 2>be turned into a child, you might end up with

0:35:14.360 --> 0:35:18.440
<v Speaker 2>an evil doppelganger. There's just so much that can happen.

0:35:18.640 --> 0:35:22.040
<v Speaker 2>It probably won't, but there's a non zero chance.

0:35:22.480 --> 0:35:26.319
<v Speaker 3>Do you remember the transporter incident from spaceballs where Melbrook's

0:35:26.400 --> 0:35:28.840
<v Speaker 3>top half gets put on backwards so his butt is

0:35:28.880 --> 0:35:29.440
<v Speaker 3>in the front.

0:35:30.280 --> 0:35:32.080
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Oh yeah, that's a good one. I'd forgot we

0:35:32.080 --> 0:35:33.440
<v Speaker 2>should have mentioned that in the episode.

0:35:33.680 --> 0:35:36.759
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, that's a good one, actually, one of I mean,

0:35:36.800 --> 0:35:39.759
<v Speaker 3>not great, but one of the less horrifying outcomes.

0:35:40.920 --> 0:35:42.360
<v Speaker 2>I can't remember. Did they fix it or was it

0:35:42.440 --> 0:35:43.200
<v Speaker 2>just stuck that way? Yeah?

0:35:43.200 --> 0:35:45.040
<v Speaker 3>I think they've beam him back and fix it. Okay,

0:35:45.200 --> 0:35:47.840
<v Speaker 3>but briefly he's looking down at his own butt and

0:35:48.040 --> 0:35:49.480
<v Speaker 3>that would be a strange experience.

0:35:57.680 --> 0:35:59.480
<v Speaker 2>All right. This next one comes to us from a

0:35:59.560 --> 0:36:03.719
<v Speaker 2>listen Joe. Joe says, huge fan of Wookie, so I

0:36:03.760 --> 0:36:07.240
<v Speaker 2>love Star Trek week. Kidding, kidding. There is a wearable

0:36:07.280 --> 0:36:10.840
<v Speaker 2>headset designed to help folks with limited vision called the Jordie.

0:36:11.320 --> 0:36:14.160
<v Speaker 2>You can probably guess what it looks like before you

0:36:14.200 --> 0:36:17.000
<v Speaker 2>google it. As a geek and fan of your show,

0:36:17.040 --> 0:36:20.560
<v Speaker 2>I enjoyed the myriad episode topics on the various episodes

0:36:20.600 --> 0:36:22.600
<v Speaker 2>this week. I don't know why, but it compelled me

0:36:22.640 --> 0:36:26.040
<v Speaker 2>to suggest a potential topic for the future. The Jordi

0:36:26.120 --> 0:36:29.400
<v Speaker 2>wearables were inspired by fiction, but now they are clearly

0:36:29.560 --> 0:36:33.920
<v Speaker 2>or could clearly become brigenitor tech to an actual visor

0:36:34.000 --> 0:36:37.879
<v Speaker 2>that works like Jordie's visor in Star Trek. For those

0:36:37.880 --> 0:36:40.799
<v Speaker 2>of you who aren't aware, this is Jeordie LaForge played

0:36:40.840 --> 0:36:45.239
<v Speaker 2>by the great LeVar Burton. He was visually impaired and

0:36:45.360 --> 0:36:48.440
<v Speaker 2>had to wear this visor device that I think had

0:36:48.480 --> 0:36:50.960
<v Speaker 2>some sort of a neural link system as well that

0:36:51.160 --> 0:36:54.359
<v Speaker 2>enabled him to see any right, Joe continues, have y'all

0:36:54.360 --> 0:36:57.120
<v Speaker 2>covered this topic before or do you see any meat

0:36:57.160 --> 0:37:01.800
<v Speaker 2>on the bone for an episode that inspires science, which

0:37:01.800 --> 0:37:06.319
<v Speaker 2>inspires fiction into this perpetual cycle of innovation and then

0:37:06.400 --> 0:37:09.440
<v Speaker 2>is a complete Aside myself and a fellow blind buddy,

0:37:09.480 --> 0:37:12.000
<v Speaker 2>we're straining our brains the other day trying to make

0:37:12.320 --> 0:37:16.279
<v Speaker 2>a list of seminal Jordy centric episodes. Do any come

0:37:16.320 --> 0:37:19.160
<v Speaker 2>to mind? Do you happen to have a Jordy episode

0:37:19.320 --> 0:37:23.520
<v Speaker 2>or moment you particularly are fond of? Anyway, as ever,

0:37:23.680 --> 0:37:26.279
<v Speaker 2>thanks for the work y'all put in each episode and

0:37:26.320 --> 0:37:29.799
<v Speaker 2>the fun informative content it creates all the best.

0:37:30.200 --> 0:37:33.000
<v Speaker 3>Well, thank you, Joe. Now, I don't have a lot

0:37:33.040 --> 0:37:36.560
<v Speaker 3>of memory because the only Next Generation I watched, and

0:37:36.640 --> 0:37:39.400
<v Speaker 3>it's been a while on this was like the first

0:37:39.440 --> 0:37:43.359
<v Speaker 3>season or so, so I have less exposure than Rob,

0:37:43.400 --> 0:37:45.120
<v Speaker 3>does Rob, do you have a Jordy moment?

0:37:45.520 --> 0:37:48.799
<v Speaker 2>Oh? Well, man, I wish I had better answer here,

0:37:48.800 --> 0:37:50.560
<v Speaker 2>And I think I would if I'd watched all these

0:37:50.600 --> 0:37:52.800
<v Speaker 2>episodes more recently, and I could tell you. Okay, I

0:37:52.800 --> 0:37:57.040
<v Speaker 2>think this is the episode where Jordie's character is presented

0:37:57.080 --> 0:38:00.440
<v Speaker 2>in the strongest fashion and developed, and it has a

0:38:00.480 --> 0:38:03.960
<v Speaker 2>lot to do plot wise. But I guess the main

0:38:04.000 --> 0:38:06.480
<v Speaker 2>one that comes to mind is an episode titled The

0:38:06.520 --> 0:38:08.680
<v Speaker 2>Next Phase that I think we even referenced in our

0:38:08.719 --> 0:38:13.560
<v Speaker 2>teleportation episodes. This is one where Jordie and in Sign

0:38:13.719 --> 0:38:17.680
<v Speaker 2>Row are lost in a teleporter accident and become like

0:38:17.800 --> 0:38:22.080
<v Speaker 2>transporter ghosts on the ship. So my memory of this episode,

0:38:22.080 --> 0:38:25.759
<v Speaker 2>which could be highly flawed, is that is that these

0:38:25.760 --> 0:38:29.160
<v Speaker 2>two characters are front and center, and you know, therefore

0:38:29.200 --> 0:38:31.560
<v Speaker 2>have a lot of agency and are directly involved in

0:38:31.600 --> 0:38:35.000
<v Speaker 2>the threat and the problem of the episode, and therefore

0:38:35.160 --> 0:38:37.160
<v Speaker 2>that one stands out. And then I have a lot

0:38:37.160 --> 0:38:39.920
<v Speaker 2>of vague memories of different episodes where, of course Jordi

0:38:40.680 --> 0:38:44.920
<v Speaker 2>is an instrumental member of the team in solving a

0:38:44.920 --> 0:38:46.080
<v Speaker 2>particular crisis.

0:38:46.600 --> 0:38:48.439
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, I wish I could remember more about the show

0:38:48.480 --> 0:38:51.120
<v Speaker 3>other than I remember somebody getting eaten by mud puddle.

0:38:51.800 --> 0:38:55.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, that was the key early episode. Yeah, that was

0:38:55.040 --> 0:38:58.920
<v Speaker 2>pretty terrifying. But getting back to this idea of this

0:38:58.960 --> 0:39:03.680
<v Speaker 2>sort of cyclical loop of science fiction and science yeah,

0:39:03.680 --> 0:39:06.279
<v Speaker 2>I think there might be something there, maybe some sort

0:39:06.280 --> 0:39:10.240
<v Speaker 2>of an invention catch all episode or series. It looks

0:39:10.320 --> 0:39:14.359
<v Speaker 2>for possible inventions that line up with this. I feel

0:39:14.400 --> 0:39:16.840
<v Speaker 2>like there's I'd have to think about it, but I

0:39:16.880 --> 0:39:19.200
<v Speaker 2>think we've covered one or two things like this in

0:39:19.239 --> 0:39:22.400
<v Speaker 2>the past. But yeah, I'll I'll have to give it

0:39:22.480 --> 0:39:22.880
<v Speaker 2>some thought.

0:39:23.480 --> 0:39:25.680
<v Speaker 3>All right. This next message is still about Star Trek,

0:39:25.800 --> 0:39:34.000
<v Speaker 3>comes from Ken. Ken says, I'm way behind on episodes,

0:39:34.000 --> 0:39:36.760
<v Speaker 3>but wanted to comment on your Star Trek transporter episode.

0:39:37.080 --> 0:39:39.720
<v Speaker 3>I've heard this debate on if you die every time

0:39:39.800 --> 0:39:43.480
<v Speaker 3>you're transported, but in Star Trek, it's clearly established that

0:39:43.560 --> 0:39:47.320
<v Speaker 3>your consciousness stays with you the entire process. The idea

0:39:47.360 --> 0:39:50.200
<v Speaker 3>that you are in one place then suddenly another as

0:39:50.239 --> 0:39:53.400
<v Speaker 3>your atoms are put back together isn't canon in the show.

0:39:53.920 --> 0:39:57.600
<v Speaker 3>There are multiple episodes where you see how the place

0:39:57.640 --> 0:40:00.840
<v Speaker 3>you're at slowly fades to gray in the new place

0:40:00.880 --> 0:40:05.080
<v Speaker 3>slowly materializes. That would not be possible if you weren't conscious.

0:40:05.239 --> 0:40:08.840
<v Speaker 3>Until being realigned. There's an episode of the Next Generation

0:40:09.000 --> 0:40:12.960
<v Speaker 3>titled Realm of Fear where Lieutenant Barkley sees something in

0:40:12.960 --> 0:40:16.320
<v Speaker 3>the transporter stream in between one place and the destination

0:40:16.760 --> 0:40:19.120
<v Speaker 3>and later grabs one of the creatures to pull it

0:40:19.200 --> 0:40:24.080
<v Speaker 3>out of the stream. Clearly Barkley's consciousness travels unbroken the

0:40:24.200 --> 0:40:29.280
<v Speaker 3>entire transport just some food for thought, Ken, Well, thank you, Ken.

0:40:29.760 --> 0:40:32.239
<v Speaker 3>So on one hand, I don't want to argue with

0:40:32.400 --> 0:40:35.440
<v Speaker 3>stuff that's just axiomatically part of the show. So if

0:40:35.480 --> 0:40:38.960
<v Speaker 3>it's axiomatically part of the Star Trek universe that your

0:40:39.000 --> 0:40:41.920
<v Speaker 3>consciousness is the same and survives the whole process, I

0:40:41.960 --> 0:40:45.960
<v Speaker 3>can't really argue with that. But even though what you

0:40:46.040 --> 0:40:50.520
<v Speaker 3>say intuitively makes sense that you know, being conscious through

0:40:50.520 --> 0:40:53.640
<v Speaker 3>a kind of fading in and out process would eliminate

0:40:53.719 --> 0:40:57.520
<v Speaker 3>the worries about, you know, the person going in dying,

0:40:57.960 --> 0:41:01.520
<v Speaker 3>I don't think that actually does solve that problem, because

0:41:01.560 --> 0:41:05.640
<v Speaker 3>how could you ever verify that the experience was continuous

0:41:05.719 --> 0:41:09.160
<v Speaker 3>for the person that went in this This is a

0:41:09.280 --> 0:41:13.080
<v Speaker 3>sort of restating the original problem again. But if the

0:41:13.160 --> 0:41:16.400
<v Speaker 3>person that comes out has the memories of the person

0:41:16.400 --> 0:41:20.040
<v Speaker 3>that went in, it will seem always to have been

0:41:20.120 --> 0:41:23.680
<v Speaker 3>continuous for them. But is there any way the output

0:41:23.719 --> 0:41:28.000
<v Speaker 3>Spock could tell the difference between existing continuously the entire

0:41:28.040 --> 0:41:32.280
<v Speaker 3>time is one person versus being a newly created Spock

0:41:32.440 --> 0:41:36.000
<v Speaker 3>with all of input Spock's memories and input Spock is

0:41:36.040 --> 0:41:40.000
<v Speaker 3>now dead. I think technically there's just no way to

0:41:40.080 --> 0:41:42.800
<v Speaker 3>verify that, And in fact, there's no way to verify

0:41:42.840 --> 0:41:45.880
<v Speaker 3>that this doesn't happen every single second of our lives.

0:41:45.960 --> 0:41:49.000
<v Speaker 3>That you know, there's some you that died and is

0:41:49.040 --> 0:41:51.560
<v Speaker 3>gone now and you're just a new you with the

0:41:51.600 --> 0:41:54.680
<v Speaker 3>memories of that old you. But I think the reason

0:41:54.719 --> 0:41:56.920
<v Speaker 3>we don't assume that about every single second of our

0:41:56.960 --> 0:41:59.920
<v Speaker 3>lives is that we don't have any reason to believe

0:42:00.160 --> 0:42:04.480
<v Speaker 3>that's the case. Molecular disassembly and then reassembly of the

0:42:04.520 --> 0:42:08.279
<v Speaker 3>brain especially does give you a reason to wonder that. So,

0:42:08.640 --> 0:42:12.680
<v Speaker 3>in my opinion, that would hold true whether the experience

0:42:12.880 --> 0:42:16.520
<v Speaker 3>was an instantaneous copy paste into a new place or

0:42:16.680 --> 0:42:19.720
<v Speaker 3>kind of gradual fading in and out. At some point

0:42:19.840 --> 0:42:22.799
<v Speaker 3>during the fade, you would have to wonder did the

0:42:22.880 --> 0:42:27.000
<v Speaker 3>old Spock cease to exist? And the new Spok wouldn't

0:42:27.040 --> 0:42:29.440
<v Speaker 3>have any way to figure that out. It would feel

0:42:29.480 --> 0:42:31.359
<v Speaker 3>continuous to the newspak either way.

0:42:32.000 --> 0:42:35.200
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, and especially since that an individual in this scenario

0:42:35.200 --> 0:42:41.799
<v Speaker 2>would still be narratively defining and understanding the human experience

0:42:42.760 --> 0:42:46.560
<v Speaker 2>and telling stories about who we were in r and

0:42:46.600 --> 0:42:49.640
<v Speaker 2>how these two are connected or more than two, how

0:42:49.719 --> 0:42:52.600
<v Speaker 2>every little person in this chain of being are connected,

0:42:52.840 --> 0:42:57.600
<v Speaker 2>and not seeing them as distinct others that have like

0:42:57.640 --> 0:43:01.040
<v Speaker 2>a tiny death standing between each one. Yeah, but why

0:43:01.080 --> 0:43:02.800
<v Speaker 2>not you could easily put that forward. I don't know

0:43:02.840 --> 0:43:06.359
<v Speaker 2>how compelling that would be, you know, if you were

0:43:06.360 --> 0:43:08.719
<v Speaker 2>to try and force that on a civilization or I

0:43:08.719 --> 0:43:10.400
<v Speaker 2>don't know, you know, to get into sort of like

0:43:10.480 --> 0:43:12.600
<v Speaker 2>world building and sci fi, like what kind of a

0:43:12.600 --> 0:43:17.440
<v Speaker 2>civilization would have that kind of worldview for themselves and

0:43:17.480 --> 0:43:20.760
<v Speaker 2>what it would accomplish. But it's interesting to think.

0:43:20.600 --> 0:43:25.239
<v Speaker 3>About would it have any effect on reality other you know,

0:43:25.480 --> 0:43:28.080
<v Speaker 3>like would that actually change anything?

0:43:29.160 --> 0:43:31.279
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I mean one way that comes to mind

0:43:31.360 --> 0:43:35.759
<v Speaker 2>is like criminal justice, right, I mean, if you have

0:43:35.800 --> 0:43:38.400
<v Speaker 2>a world in which there's more of an intrinsic understanding

0:43:38.440 --> 0:43:40.360
<v Speaker 2>that we are not the person we used to be,

0:43:40.960 --> 0:43:44.759
<v Speaker 2>that that person is like many deaths removed from who

0:43:44.800 --> 0:43:49.440
<v Speaker 2>we are now and just shares certain memories and so forth,

0:43:50.200 --> 0:43:54.279
<v Speaker 2>maybe there's a stronger inclination to believe than change in

0:43:54.320 --> 0:43:59.920
<v Speaker 2>an individual, and the ability to move on from past transgression.

0:44:00.120 --> 0:44:00.520
<v Speaker 2>I don't know.

0:44:00.719 --> 0:44:02.759
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, well, I guess that if that were the if

0:44:02.800 --> 0:44:04.560
<v Speaker 3>you were to apply it in that way, that would

0:44:04.560 --> 0:44:07.239
<v Speaker 3>sort of apply to every single thing in life. You

0:44:07.280 --> 0:44:09.919
<v Speaker 3>would sort of not ever believe any person had any

0:44:09.920 --> 0:44:12.120
<v Speaker 3>connection to anything they had already done.

0:44:12.400 --> 0:44:14.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, you could just write on your coattails because those

0:44:14.680 --> 0:44:17.799
<v Speaker 2>aren't your coatails or someone else's. But that's always the

0:44:17.840 --> 0:44:21.400
<v Speaker 2>case too, right, So yeah, there's a there's a lot

0:44:21.440 --> 0:44:24.200
<v Speaker 2>of interesting room for thought here. If listeners, if you

0:44:24.440 --> 0:44:28.239
<v Speaker 2>know of a work of fiction, science fiction, speculative work

0:44:28.280 --> 0:44:30.840
<v Speaker 2>out there that has entertained any of these ideas right in,

0:44:30.960 --> 0:44:33.200
<v Speaker 2>we'd love to hear from you. All right, we'll skip

0:44:33.200 --> 0:44:36.080
<v Speaker 2>ahead to some weird house send them a listener mail

0:44:36.120 --> 0:44:39.640
<v Speaker 2>here as we begin to close out this episode, Let's

0:44:39.640 --> 0:44:42.799
<v Speaker 2>see what we have in the old mail bag here.

0:44:43.239 --> 0:44:46.080
<v Speaker 2>Let's see this is an older one. This one was

0:44:46.120 --> 0:44:48.960
<v Speaker 2>I think pre Halloween, so it was responding to a

0:44:49.040 --> 0:44:53.839
<v Speaker 2>call out for Halloween episode suggestions. But it's always there's

0:44:53.840 --> 0:44:56.719
<v Speaker 2>always another Halloween on the way, and we will presumably

0:44:56.760 --> 0:45:00.319
<v Speaker 2>be around for that Halloween. So I would say, yeah,

0:45:00.440 --> 0:45:02.680
<v Speaker 2>keep him coming. This one comes to us from Carry.

0:45:07.920 --> 0:45:11.200
<v Speaker 2>Carrie says, Dear Robin Joe. Here are my three Vincent

0:45:11.239 --> 0:45:13.680
<v Speaker 2>Price movies that you haven't covered on Weird House that

0:45:13.840 --> 0:45:17.560
<v Speaker 2>might fit in. Only one has horror vibes, but they

0:45:17.600 --> 0:45:22.120
<v Speaker 2>all have Price in different roles. Okay, let's hear it first.

0:45:22.200 --> 0:45:26.040
<v Speaker 2>Up His Kind of Woman nineteen fifty one. Other stars

0:45:26.040 --> 0:45:29.520
<v Speaker 2>are Robert Mitcham, Jane Russell, and Raymond Burr, who portrays

0:45:29.560 --> 0:45:34.239
<v Speaker 2>a menacing mob boss. Price is a rich dilettante who

0:45:34.400 --> 0:45:37.319
<v Speaker 2>steps up when the situation requires it. It's set on

0:45:37.400 --> 0:45:41.680
<v Speaker 2>a tourist island in the Caribbean. I have not seen this,

0:45:42.040 --> 0:45:45.480
<v Speaker 2>never seen this one. Like the cast list, love Robert Mitcham. Yeah,

0:45:45.520 --> 0:45:48.120
<v Speaker 2>and I do probably need to see more Vincent Price

0:45:48.200 --> 0:45:52.480
<v Speaker 2>films where he's not where he's not just a horror

0:45:52.480 --> 0:45:55.040
<v Speaker 2>figure and you know some sort of a either haunted

0:45:55.160 --> 0:45:58.160
<v Speaker 2>or haunting individual because you know he's a great actor.

0:45:58.920 --> 0:46:01.719
<v Speaker 2>Let's see the next one. Dan Juris Mission nineteen fifty four.

0:46:02.160 --> 0:46:05.200
<v Speaker 2>Other star stars are Piper Laurie, who plays a woman

0:46:05.280 --> 0:46:09.480
<v Speaker 2>fleeing from assassination after witnessing a mob killing, and Victor

0:46:09.560 --> 0:46:13.480
<v Speaker 2>Mature who plays an undercover an undercover cop trying to

0:46:13.480 --> 0:46:17.480
<v Speaker 2>prevent the mob from getting Laurie Price plays the assassin

0:46:17.560 --> 0:46:20.560
<v Speaker 2>sent to kill her. It's set in Glacier National Park.

0:46:20.719 --> 0:46:25.480
<v Speaker 3>Oh beautiful. Victor Mature came up on Weird House several

0:46:25.560 --> 0:46:28.640
<v Speaker 3>years back when I did an episode with with Seth

0:46:28.680 --> 0:46:33.840
<v Speaker 3>Nicholas Johnson about the Monkey's movie head. There's a recurring

0:46:33.960 --> 0:46:37.960
<v Speaker 3>joke in that movie where they they're like, now we're

0:46:37.960 --> 0:46:41.160
<v Speaker 3>going to address the darkest thing in the universe, Victor

0:46:41.200 --> 0:46:41.960
<v Speaker 3>Mature's hair.

0:46:43.640 --> 0:46:47.000
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. I mean it's pretty. It's a pretty dark head

0:46:47.040 --> 0:46:48.800
<v Speaker 2>of hair, as I can see see from some of

0:46:48.840 --> 0:46:50.560
<v Speaker 2>these photos.

0:46:50.600 --> 0:46:52.439
<v Speaker 3>Luxurious, tremendous hair.

0:46:52.640 --> 0:46:55.359
<v Speaker 2>Yes, all right. And then the third film recommended by

0:46:55.400 --> 0:46:58.080
<v Speaker 2>Carrie Here is The Comedy of Terrors nineteen sixty three.

0:46:58.160 --> 0:47:02.160
<v Speaker 2>Other stars are Boris Karloff, Peter Lourie, and Basil Rathbone.

0:47:02.480 --> 0:47:04.880
<v Speaker 2>Prize plays an evil man with a scheme involving an

0:47:04.880 --> 0:47:07.960
<v Speaker 2>inheritance and his sister or niece, I don't remember which.

0:47:08.160 --> 0:47:10.600
<v Speaker 2>The whole thing is played for laughs. If you're not

0:47:10.640 --> 0:47:12.600
<v Speaker 2>already familiar with the three movies, I think you would

0:47:12.680 --> 0:47:14.439
<v Speaker 2>enjoy them, And if they make the cut for Weird

0:47:14.480 --> 0:47:16.480
<v Speaker 2>house all the better. Keep up the good work. Care

0:47:17.000 --> 0:47:21.359
<v Speaker 2>Thanks for the suggestions. Yeah, I would watch all three. Yeah,

0:47:21.760 --> 0:47:23.440
<v Speaker 2>of the three, the only one I was really familiar

0:47:23.480 --> 0:47:25.880
<v Speaker 2>with this comedy of terrors. I mean, how can you

0:47:25.920 --> 0:47:37.080
<v Speaker 2>not be given the stars involved here? All right? Uh?

0:47:37.200 --> 0:47:39.600
<v Speaker 3>You cool? If I do this message from Lawrence, Yeah,

0:47:39.680 --> 0:47:42.279
<v Speaker 3>let's do it. Lawrence says, Hey, guys, shooting you a

0:47:42.280 --> 0:47:45.640
<v Speaker 3>note to comment on your rewind of Deep Blue Sea.

0:47:46.120 --> 0:47:48.160
<v Speaker 3>I missed it the first time around. Let me start

0:47:48.160 --> 0:47:50.279
<v Speaker 3>by saying I've only listened to the first half hour

0:47:50.400 --> 0:47:53.560
<v Speaker 3>or so. I stopped at the spoiler warning. I've requested

0:47:53.560 --> 0:47:57.359
<v Speaker 3>the DVD through an inter library loan extept to pick

0:47:57.400 --> 0:48:00.080
<v Speaker 3>it up at my local branch in five days or so.

0:48:00.480 --> 0:48:02.560
<v Speaker 3>After I've seen it. I'll listen to the rest and

0:48:02.600 --> 0:48:04.880
<v Speaker 3>maybe I'll have more to say then. But there are

0:48:04.880 --> 0:48:06.960
<v Speaker 3>a couple of things I'd like to comment on from

0:48:07.080 --> 0:48:10.759
<v Speaker 3>what I've heard. Beautiful, oh man, getting Deep Blue Sea

0:48:10.760 --> 0:48:14.960
<v Speaker 3>at the library from between libraries. This is interlibrary commerce.

0:48:15.080 --> 0:48:17.520
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, take advantage of it. You know, we've We've heard

0:48:17.520 --> 0:48:19.640
<v Speaker 2>from other listeners out there, and I have family members

0:48:19.640 --> 0:48:21.799
<v Speaker 2>who do this as have done this as well. You know,

0:48:21.840 --> 0:48:25.839
<v Speaker 2>getting movies through their local library. Yeah, the resources there.

0:48:25.840 --> 0:48:28.200
<v Speaker 2>Take advantage of it, oh man, though I do have

0:48:28.239 --> 0:48:32.080
<v Speaker 2>to confess something. Just reading or hearing the phrase interlibrary

0:48:32.200 --> 0:48:36.040
<v Speaker 2>loan triggers like cringing of guilt in me because of

0:48:36.080 --> 0:48:38.040
<v Speaker 2>a time in grad school when I was working on

0:48:38.080 --> 0:48:40.239
<v Speaker 2>a research project and I was getting a lot of old,

0:48:40.680 --> 0:48:43.960
<v Speaker 2>rare books interlibrary loan, and there was one that I

0:48:44.360 --> 0:48:45.399
<v Speaker 2>had out way too long.

0:48:45.480 --> 0:48:47.440
<v Speaker 3>It took me. I was late getting it back, like

0:48:47.520 --> 0:48:50.000
<v Speaker 3>severely late, and I've felt guilty ever since.

0:48:50.080 --> 0:48:51.279
<v Speaker 2>Did are you sure you returned it?

0:48:51.400 --> 0:48:53.880
<v Speaker 3>I did finally, it was like months late, and I

0:48:54.320 --> 0:48:55.040
<v Speaker 3>felt horrible.

0:48:55.840 --> 0:48:58.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, well, I think we all have we a lot

0:48:58.440 --> 0:49:01.440
<v Speaker 2>similar memories. Right, there's a little bit of nervousness. Will

0:49:01.480 --> 0:49:04.920
<v Speaker 2>we return it on time? But again, definitely take advantage

0:49:04.960 --> 0:49:07.920
<v Speaker 2>of these. This is I'm comfortable with my tax dollars

0:49:07.960 --> 0:49:12.080
<v Speaker 2>being used to move copies of Deep Flucy around the

0:49:12.640 --> 0:49:13.600
<v Speaker 2>Tri County area.

0:49:14.239 --> 0:49:16.680
<v Speaker 3>Presumably this is not like a rare book that you

0:49:16.920 --> 0:49:19.840
<v Speaker 3>will be severely missed, but still you should return it

0:49:19.880 --> 0:49:24.400
<v Speaker 3>on time of course. Anyway, Lawrence goes on, probably others

0:49:24.440 --> 0:49:27.239
<v Speaker 3>have pointed this out from the first podcasting, but I

0:49:27.360 --> 0:49:29.839
<v Speaker 3>balked at your assertion that there have been eighteen point

0:49:29.880 --> 0:49:32.640
<v Speaker 3>six billion shark movies made in the US. I don't

0:49:32.640 --> 0:49:35.839
<v Speaker 3>remember saying that, but this sounds about right, Lawrence says.

0:49:35.920 --> 0:49:38.200
<v Speaker 3>I had to pause, rewind, and listen again to make

0:49:38.239 --> 0:49:40.480
<v Speaker 3>sure I heard you right. I'm pretty sure there haven't

0:49:40.520 --> 0:49:43.879
<v Speaker 3>been that many movies made in the history of cinema worldwide,

0:49:43.920 --> 0:49:47.320
<v Speaker 3>never mind shark movies. Now. I didn't do real research,

0:49:47.400 --> 0:49:50.240
<v Speaker 3>but I did a little quick googling. When I asked

0:49:50.320 --> 0:49:52.680
<v Speaker 3>Google how many shark movies had been made, the number

0:49:52.760 --> 0:49:56.320
<v Speaker 3>it gave me was one hundred and eighty psh. Definitely

0:49:56.360 --> 0:49:59.239
<v Speaker 3>more than that. When I googled how many movies have

0:49:59.360 --> 0:50:02.200
<v Speaker 3>been made in the history of cinema, it's at estimates

0:50:02.280 --> 0:50:05.880
<v Speaker 3>range from hundreds of thousands to perhaps more than a million.

0:50:06.400 --> 0:50:08.399
<v Speaker 3>Google isn't the be all and end all, but those

0:50:08.480 --> 0:50:11.759
<v Speaker 3>numbers sound reasonable. For there to be eighteen point six

0:50:11.840 --> 0:50:14.680
<v Speaker 3>billion shark movies made in the US, there would need

0:50:14.680 --> 0:50:17.319
<v Speaker 3>to be about fifty four for each person living there

0:50:17.520 --> 0:50:19.920
<v Speaker 3>who made all these shark movies. I didn't make my

0:50:20.080 --> 0:50:24.759
<v Speaker 3>fifty four shark movies. On a more serious note, I

0:50:24.880 --> 0:50:28.880
<v Speaker 3>can't agree with your gushing praise of Jaws to be fair,

0:50:28.960 --> 0:50:31.239
<v Speaker 3>it may fall into the category of films I might

0:50:31.280 --> 0:50:34.359
<v Speaker 3>have liked had I not read the book first. The

0:50:34.360 --> 0:50:36.800
<v Speaker 3>film isn't as good as the novel, and the novel

0:50:36.880 --> 0:50:39.879
<v Speaker 3>isn't exactly a masterpiece. It's been a long time since

0:50:39.880 --> 0:50:42.240
<v Speaker 3>I've read it, But as memory serves, the novel offered

0:50:42.280 --> 0:50:46.240
<v Speaker 3>credible characters behaving in ways I found consistent with each character,

0:50:46.560 --> 0:50:49.799
<v Speaker 3>and a good balance between subplots and the main storyline.

0:50:49.840 --> 0:50:52.799
<v Speaker 3>The film discards most of the subplot, probably to save

0:50:52.880 --> 0:50:55.600
<v Speaker 3>on length, and focuses on the main plot, which I

0:50:55.640 --> 0:50:58.560
<v Speaker 3>find less engaging. And in the film, I don't find

0:50:58.600 --> 0:51:01.279
<v Speaker 3>the shark hunt credible at all. Richard Dreyfus knows a

0:51:01.320 --> 0:51:03.680
<v Speaker 3>good deal about sharks, but he can't tie a knot,

0:51:03.840 --> 0:51:06.920
<v Speaker 3>let alone sail a boat. Roy Scheider is terrified of

0:51:06.960 --> 0:51:09.840
<v Speaker 3>the water, never mind a shark, and Robert Shaw is

0:51:09.880 --> 0:51:12.839
<v Speaker 3>constantly drunk. These guys don't need a shark to kill them.

0:51:12.880 --> 0:51:16.120
<v Speaker 3>They're bound to capsize the boat and drown. I'm hoping

0:51:16.120 --> 0:51:18.919
<v Speaker 3>I'll like Deep Lucy better find out in five days

0:51:19.000 --> 0:51:23.000
<v Speaker 3>or so. Thanks for bringing it to my attention, Lawrence, Well, Lawrence,

0:51:23.480 --> 0:51:26.839
<v Speaker 3>I don't know what I think. I could not possibly

0:51:26.920 --> 0:51:30.040
<v Speaker 3>disagree with you more about Jaws the novel and Jaws

0:51:30.080 --> 0:51:34.360
<v Speaker 3>the movie, but I respect your opinion, you know, respectfully disagree.

0:51:34.760 --> 0:51:37.280
<v Speaker 3>I think I've read the novel and seen the movie.

0:51:37.360 --> 0:51:40.640
<v Speaker 3>I think the movie is marvelous, and I almost hated

0:51:40.680 --> 0:51:41.200
<v Speaker 3>the novel.

0:51:42.000 --> 0:51:45.040
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, I never read the original novel. I did read

0:51:45.080 --> 0:51:48.399
<v Speaker 2>his giant squid novel Beast, Yeah, which had a big

0:51:48.440 --> 0:51:51.799
<v Speaker 2>squid arm on the front and it was textured so

0:51:51.840 --> 0:51:53.680
<v Speaker 2>you could you could rub your fingers over it and

0:51:53.760 --> 0:51:56.440
<v Speaker 2>kind of like read the suckers on it.

0:51:56.680 --> 0:51:58.480
<v Speaker 3>Oh man, I want to feel that right now.

0:51:58.680 --> 0:52:00.879
<v Speaker 2>Yeah. Yeah, I think they actually made a film version

0:52:00.920 --> 0:52:03.000
<v Speaker 2>of that, But I haven't seen the film adaptation, so,

0:52:03.760 --> 0:52:06.000
<v Speaker 2>but I have seen Jaws. I do love Jaws. But

0:52:07.200 --> 0:52:10.319
<v Speaker 2>Jaws is one of those films that was is such

0:52:10.360 --> 0:52:14.800
<v Speaker 2>an important film in the history of American cinema, especially

0:52:14.920 --> 0:52:20.600
<v Speaker 2>blockbuster American cinema. You can't discount it's it's importance and

0:52:20.680 --> 0:52:22.920
<v Speaker 2>its impact. But on the other hand, you know, we

0:52:22.960 --> 0:52:24.440
<v Speaker 2>don't know all have to like every movie, so I

0:52:24.440 --> 0:52:27.759
<v Speaker 2>can understand people maybe not digging it as much, or

0:52:27.760 --> 0:52:30.160
<v Speaker 2>maybe finding certain aspects of it a little bit dated

0:52:30.600 --> 0:52:32.879
<v Speaker 2>in light of everything that has come in its wake,

0:52:33.640 --> 0:52:36.200
<v Speaker 2>you know, playing off of and in some cases, I'm

0:52:36.200 --> 0:52:39.680
<v Speaker 2>sure improving on some of the concepts and ideas. As

0:52:39.719 --> 0:52:41.680
<v Speaker 2>for Deep Blue c I don't know. I hope by

0:52:41.680 --> 0:52:43.799
<v Speaker 2>the time you listen to this, you've you've man, You've

0:52:43.800 --> 0:52:45.640
<v Speaker 2>gone into the film, and you've gotten to watch it

0:52:45.719 --> 0:52:50.040
<v Speaker 2>for yourself. It's a it's a it's it's a fun

0:52:50.080 --> 0:52:52.839
<v Speaker 2>time and it has it has a couple of great

0:52:52.840 --> 0:52:58.200
<v Speaker 2>twists in it. Is it better than Jaws? Well, intelligent

0:52:58.640 --> 0:53:01.480
<v Speaker 2>intelligent folks can disagree. I think the book of Deep

0:53:01.480 --> 0:53:05.040
<v Speaker 2>Blue cy was better. There may be and there may

0:53:05.080 --> 0:53:06.600
<v Speaker 2>have been a no I had no idea.

0:53:06.680 --> 0:53:09.359
<v Speaker 3>I just assumed there wasn't Maybe there was a novelization.

0:53:09.920 --> 0:53:12.239
<v Speaker 2>A quick search would indicate that there was not a

0:53:12.280 --> 0:53:17.200
<v Speaker 2>novelization of Deep Blue Sea. Though you know, I'm very

0:53:17.280 --> 0:53:21.040
<v Speaker 2>mention in favor of film novelizations, so I wish that

0:53:21.080 --> 0:53:23.400
<v Speaker 2>it was not the case. All Right, We're going to

0:53:23.440 --> 0:53:26.120
<v Speaker 2>do one last weird House Cinema listener mail. This one's

0:53:26.120 --> 0:53:30.320
<v Speaker 2>from David and it contains major spoilers for Dark City.

0:53:30.400 --> 0:53:32.520
<v Speaker 2>This is a response to our episode, our two part

0:53:33.719 --> 0:53:37.360
<v Speaker 2>look at the movie Dark City. So if you haven't

0:53:37.400 --> 0:53:39.640
<v Speaker 2>seen Dark City and you would like to avoid those spoilers,

0:53:40.520 --> 0:53:41.919
<v Speaker 2>and maybe this is a good time to go ahead

0:53:41.920 --> 0:53:46.560
<v Speaker 2>and end your listening of this episode, But for those

0:53:46.600 --> 0:53:50.680
<v Speaker 2>of you who are on boards or spoilers will continue.

0:53:55.160 --> 0:53:57.719
<v Speaker 2>David says, hey, guys, it was great to hear you

0:53:57.760 --> 0:54:00.000
<v Speaker 2>discuss Dark City on the two part Weird House Cinema.

0:54:00.520 --> 0:54:02.920
<v Speaker 2>I remember first seeing this back in the nineties and

0:54:03.000 --> 0:54:06.000
<v Speaker 2>have rewatched it earlier this year. There is definitely a

0:54:06.080 --> 0:54:09.120
<v Speaker 2>post matrix and other CGI movie lens that make some

0:54:09.239 --> 0:54:12.120
<v Speaker 2>of the effects seem a little pedestrian. One thing that

0:54:12.160 --> 0:54:14.600
<v Speaker 2>I never thought of until listening to the part two

0:54:14.640 --> 0:54:17.920
<v Speaker 2>episode was the food situation. Your discussion of the automat

0:54:18.200 --> 0:54:20.920
<v Speaker 2>and not being touched by human hands really sparked this.

0:54:21.520 --> 0:54:24.360
<v Speaker 2>In the end, John defeats the aliens and gives everyone

0:54:24.640 --> 0:54:27.719
<v Speaker 2>a beach, but is he now responsible for feeding all

0:54:27.760 --> 0:54:30.400
<v Speaker 2>of them? How did the aliens create the food? There

0:54:30.440 --> 0:54:33.319
<v Speaker 2>are no farms, crops, or even livestock unless they are

0:54:33.360 --> 0:54:36.880
<v Speaker 2>elsewhere housed on the ship. I presume that the aliens

0:54:36.920 --> 0:54:39.440
<v Speaker 2>had to prepare all the food for the human's survival,

0:54:39.640 --> 0:54:43.320
<v Speaker 2>or did they maybe use another methods such as injected nutrition.

0:54:44.040 --> 0:54:47.680
<v Speaker 2>Either way, it's now John's responsibility to ensure this population

0:54:47.800 --> 0:54:50.399
<v Speaker 2>does not starve. It's all well and good to give

0:54:50.440 --> 0:54:52.920
<v Speaker 2>them hope of the beach, but I just don't know

0:54:52.960 --> 0:54:56.360
<v Speaker 2>how he can manage the nutritional infrastructure. There are also

0:54:56.400 --> 0:54:59.520
<v Speaker 2>other things that go into functioning city that the aliens

0:54:59.560 --> 0:55:02.320
<v Speaker 2>were taking care of. I can just imagine the massive

0:55:02.320 --> 0:55:05.359
<v Speaker 2>amount of work that John just gave himself and wonder

0:55:05.520 --> 0:55:07.760
<v Speaker 2>if he would have been better off the other way.

0:55:08.040 --> 0:55:11.000
<v Speaker 2>The sequel to Dark City should be subtitled Getting Tired

0:55:11.040 --> 0:55:14.440
<v Speaker 2>of This anyway. Thanks for the episode and the podcast. David,

0:55:15.040 --> 0:55:15.840
<v Speaker 2>very good question.

0:55:15.960 --> 0:55:18.560
<v Speaker 3>Yeah, it's almost like you you go into a zoo

0:55:18.600 --> 0:55:21.240
<v Speaker 3>and set all the animals free, and it's like you're great,

0:55:21.320 --> 0:55:24.040
<v Speaker 3>now go live. But it's like, how are they gonna

0:55:24.120 --> 0:55:25.040
<v Speaker 3>get food?

0:55:25.520 --> 0:55:27.680
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, Like we see those those great scenes where the

0:55:27.680 --> 0:55:32.240
<v Speaker 2>strangers are meticulously like an assembly line preparing the pocket

0:55:32.280 --> 0:55:35.200
<v Speaker 2>contents for everyone in the city. I can easily imagine

0:55:35.200 --> 0:55:39.360
<v Speaker 2>they're also making sandwiches for the automad and so forth,

0:55:39.520 --> 0:55:41.239
<v Speaker 2>you know, engaging in all of this work. And who's

0:55:41.239 --> 0:55:42.160
<v Speaker 2>going to do that work? Now?

0:55:42.320 --> 0:55:45.200
<v Speaker 3>Yeah? No, I guess it's it's actually worse than the

0:55:45.760 --> 0:55:48.480
<v Speaker 3>zoo example, because then you could imagine at least animals

0:55:48.520 --> 0:55:50.880
<v Speaker 3>can forage, there'd be some chance, like this is a

0:55:51.080 --> 0:55:53.239
<v Speaker 3>thing floating in space. Where does any of the food

0:55:53.280 --> 0:55:53.640
<v Speaker 3>come from?

0:55:53.719 --> 0:55:58.120
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, unless unless on the other side, where presumably the

0:55:58.120 --> 0:56:00.960
<v Speaker 2>sun or the sunlike energy so has been hanging out

0:56:01.000 --> 0:56:03.960
<v Speaker 2>the whole time. Maybe they're vast crops and gardens and

0:56:04.600 --> 0:56:06.960
<v Speaker 2>farms there. But yeah, we just don't know.

0:56:07.840 --> 0:56:11.239
<v Speaker 3>I guess one question is do we ever see what

0:56:11.440 --> 0:56:15.080
<v Speaker 3>is the full extent of the tuning power that the

0:56:15.120 --> 0:56:19.160
<v Speaker 3>aliens and John Murdock possess. Is it like the Star

0:56:19.239 --> 0:56:23.239
<v Speaker 3>Trek Replicator. Can they just imagine objects into full existence

0:56:23.239 --> 0:56:25.680
<v Speaker 3>out of bear atoms or do they do they? Is

0:56:25.719 --> 0:56:28.719
<v Speaker 3>it more just kind of a telekinesis kind of shaping

0:56:29.080 --> 0:56:30.240
<v Speaker 3>and moving power.

0:56:30.719 --> 0:56:33.480
<v Speaker 2>Yeah, we never see him tune a sandwich into existence.

0:56:33.560 --> 0:56:35.400
<v Speaker 2>That would have answered a lot of questions.

0:56:35.960 --> 0:56:38.799
<v Speaker 3>Or the green jello from the automatic Yeah, make me

0:56:38.840 --> 0:56:39.440
<v Speaker 3>green yellow.

0:56:39.520 --> 0:56:42.480
<v Speaker 2>Now it's the greenest food they know of in Dark City.

0:56:43.200 --> 0:56:45.440
<v Speaker 3>No one in Dark City has ever had a salad.

0:56:48.320 --> 0:56:50.719
<v Speaker 2>It's gonna blow their mind. Yeah, it's a.

0:56:50.800 --> 0:56:54.160
<v Speaker 3>City of just fried eggs and green jello. All right,

0:56:54.200 --> 0:56:55.440
<v Speaker 3>does that do it for this episode?

0:56:55.640 --> 0:56:57.439
<v Speaker 2>I think that does it for this episode? But hey,

0:56:57.480 --> 0:56:59.600
<v Speaker 2>we still had a list of males that we didn't

0:56:59.600 --> 0:57:03.399
<v Speaker 2>get to for this episode, and you should certainly keep

0:57:03.440 --> 0:57:05.560
<v Speaker 2>sending them in because we read everything that comes in.

0:57:05.600 --> 0:57:07.840
<v Speaker 2>We don't get to read everything on the show, but

0:57:08.160 --> 0:57:09.919
<v Speaker 2>if you send it, we will read it, at least

0:57:09.920 --> 0:57:14.120
<v Speaker 2>to ourselves. And as we continue our journey through the holidays,

0:57:14.160 --> 0:57:16.080
<v Speaker 2>we're going to do more listener mails. We try to

0:57:16.080 --> 0:57:18.920
<v Speaker 2>do one every month or so anyway, but there may

0:57:18.960 --> 0:57:21.280
<v Speaker 2>be an opportunity to fit in an extra one as

0:57:21.320 --> 0:57:25.120
<v Speaker 2>we proceed. In the meantime, we'll just remind everyone out

0:57:25.120 --> 0:57:27.000
<v Speaker 2>there that's Stuff to Blow Your Mind is a science

0:57:27.000 --> 0:57:29.960
<v Speaker 2>and culture podcast with core episodes on two season Thursdays

0:57:30.000 --> 0:57:32.240
<v Speaker 2>and on Fridays. We set aside most serious concerns to

0:57:32.320 --> 0:57:34.919
<v Speaker 2>just talk about a weird film on Weird House Cinema.

0:57:35.200 --> 0:57:38.880
<v Speaker 3>Huge thanks as always to our excellent audio producer JJ Posway.

0:57:39.240 --> 0:57:40.760
<v Speaker 3>If you would like to get in touch with us

0:57:40.760 --> 0:57:43.120
<v Speaker 3>with feedback on this episode or any other, to suggest

0:57:43.160 --> 0:57:45.120
<v Speaker 3>a topic for the future, or just to say hello,

0:57:45.280 --> 0:57:47.920
<v Speaker 3>you can email us at contact Stuff to Blow your

0:57:47.960 --> 0:57:55.280
<v Speaker 3>Mind dot com.

0:57:55.400 --> 0:57:58.360
<v Speaker 1>Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of iHeartRadio. For

0:57:58.440 --> 0:58:01.240
<v Speaker 1>more podcasts from my Heart Radio, visit the iHeartRadio, app,

0:58:01.360 --> 0:58:04.120
<v Speaker 1>Apple podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.