WEBVTT - Listener Mail: Halloween Hangover 2019 0:00:03.000 --> 0:00:04.840 Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind, a production of 0:00:04.880 --> 0:00:13.840 I Heart Radios How Stuff Works. Hey, welcome to Stuff 0:00:13.840 --> 0:00:16.040 to Blow your Mind. My name is Robert Lamb and 0:00:16.079 --> 0:00:20.320 I'm Joe McCormick, and it's our yearly Halloween Hangover listener 0:00:20.400 --> 0:00:23.439 mail episode. We always get tons of great listener mail. 0:00:23.680 --> 0:00:27.240 We have got an absolutely overflowing mail bag right now, 0:00:27.360 --> 0:00:30.080 so much so that we decided we're gonna do too 0:00:30.240 --> 0:00:33.519 listener mail episodes this week to catch up and frankly, 0:00:33.560 --> 0:00:34.959 to help us get through a part of the year 0:00:35.040 --> 0:00:38.000 that is always very tight and very busy. Yeah, yeah, 0:00:38.000 --> 0:00:39.720 this and then this is a good time to first 0:00:39.720 --> 0:00:43.440 of all, to have one more heaping scoop of Halloween 0:00:43.560 --> 0:00:47.280 right here in the gray zone between the end of 0:00:47.320 --> 0:00:50.600 October and you know, the beginning of saying Thanksgiving and 0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:53.920 Christmas like the full on holidays. Well, and we have 0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:56.560 we have so much great content to read here. And 0:00:56.600 --> 0:00:58.560 then after that it's gonna be it's gonna be all 0:00:58.640 --> 0:01:01.720 Christmas around here. It's gonna be Holidays like like like 0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:03.880 you've never seen it before. But also we've got some 0:01:03.960 --> 0:01:06.399 weird science lined up for the next few weeks that 0:01:06.400 --> 0:01:09.440 that you probably wouldn't believe, so you should be very excited, 0:01:09.720 --> 0:01:12.000 all right, And I'm excited as well to have Carney 0:01:12.000 --> 0:01:15.640 here with us, our mail bot who's been with us 0:01:15.640 --> 0:01:18.640 the whole time, continually changing over the years, getting new 0:01:19.640 --> 0:01:25.000 new augments, new programming, etcetera. And today is no different, right. 0:01:25.120 --> 0:01:28.640 Carney seems to have been very interested in our episodes 0:01:28.680 --> 0:01:32.160 about photography burned from the Mind's Eye, the idea of 0:01:32.200 --> 0:01:36.000 projecting images onto film that a lot of supposed psychics 0:01:36.000 --> 0:01:37.640 throughout the years have claimed to be able to do. 0:01:38.760 --> 0:01:40.760 We talked about that in a couple of Halloween episodes, 0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:43.319 and and Carney has really caught the bug. So now 0:01:43.360 --> 0:01:46.240 instead of printing out listener mail as he normally does, 0:01:46.560 --> 0:01:50.920 he projects it psychically robotically onto various bread products. So 0:01:50.960 --> 0:01:54.360 we will be reading your listener mails burned from Carney's 0:01:54.400 --> 0:01:58.280 Mind's Eye onto Tortilla's toast. PETA's all the like. Yeah, 0:01:58.320 --> 0:02:01.040 he's not supposed to be paying attention into the Invention 0:02:01.160 --> 0:02:03.360 podcast listener mail, but I think he caught a few 0:02:03.560 --> 0:02:06.120 regarding our episode on toast, and that may have also 0:02:06.200 --> 0:02:08.840 led to this current obsession. Here we go, should we 0:02:08.880 --> 0:02:13.480 jump right in, Robert, let's do it? What alright, This 0:02:13.520 --> 0:02:16.360 first message comes to us from our listener Alex. This 0:02:16.400 --> 0:02:19.360 is about the Burned from the Mind's Eye episode, and 0:02:19.440 --> 0:02:22.440 Alex writes in Hi, Robert and Joe, I just listened 0:02:22.480 --> 0:02:25.040 to the burn from the Mind's Eye podcast. A major 0:02:25.080 --> 0:02:28.120 and in visual studies in college, and remember to study 0:02:28.120 --> 0:02:31.760 about retinal mapping in the mid century. They showed a 0:02:31.800 --> 0:02:35.600 monkey a simple image and placed a radioactive film directly 0:02:35.639 --> 0:02:39.520 on the visual cortex with the monkey's brain exposed. It 0:02:39.560 --> 0:02:43.520 was basically photosensitive paper, but was sensitive to the electrical 0:02:43.560 --> 0:02:46.760 impulses of the brain. The results were a pretty accurate 0:02:46.840 --> 0:02:51.280 neuronal map to the visual stimulus, but slightly distorted. Basically, 0:02:51.320 --> 0:02:54.520 the retina is mapped specially onto the brain. While the 0:02:54.560 --> 0:02:58.239 same process probably couldn't reproduce Garfield or a complex image, 0:02:58.280 --> 0:03:00.960 you can actually get a picture to actually from the brain. 0:03:01.360 --> 0:03:04.440 Since the occipital or visual cortex is involved in mental 0:03:04.480 --> 0:03:07.120 imagery as well as in vision, it follows that with 0:03:07.160 --> 0:03:10.480 technology from the fifties and sixties, you might be able 0:03:10.520 --> 0:03:14.120 to make thoughtography of an imagined simple shape. That's assuming 0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:17.440 the visual cortex response of an imagined image is mapped 0:03:17.480 --> 0:03:21.040 the same as a visually stimulated response. So what's going 0:03:21.080 --> 0:03:23.839 on here is we were discussing in the episode how 0:03:23.880 --> 0:03:27.799 imagery is represented in the brain, and our proposition was 0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:30.800 that there's not a screen inside the brain that the 0:03:30.840 --> 0:03:35.160 brain watches imagery take place on that could be projected 0:03:35.240 --> 0:03:39.520 straight out onto thoughtography. Uh, this sort of complicates it 0:03:39.600 --> 0:03:42.840 somewhat now, I think as Alex is saying, there's no 0:03:42.880 --> 0:03:46.040 way you could like find an image of Garfield somewhere 0:03:46.080 --> 0:03:48.240 in the brain. That doesn't seem to exist even if 0:03:48.280 --> 0:03:50.920 you're picturing Garfield. But there does seem to be some 0:03:50.960 --> 0:03:54.640 correlation between what parts of the visual field are being 0:03:54.720 --> 0:03:58.880 stimulated with various types of light and what parts of 0:03:58.920 --> 0:04:01.680 the occipital cortex in the back of the head show 0:04:01.760 --> 0:04:05.520 the most activity. So you can sort of map places 0:04:05.560 --> 0:04:08.440 on the retina basically parts of the visual field of 0:04:08.480 --> 0:04:11.320 things you're looking at, to certain parts of the brain 0:04:11.440 --> 0:04:14.880 showing increased activity. And I think one consequence of this 0:04:14.960 --> 0:04:17.400 is that if you show somebody like a very simple 0:04:17.480 --> 0:04:20.640 black and white shape, you could almost sort of see 0:04:20.680 --> 0:04:25.320 a version of that shape represented in brain activity in 0:04:25.360 --> 0:04:28.200 the occipital cortex. So, yeah, it all seems to be 0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:32.240 just a matter of you know, fine tuning the technology 0:04:32.240 --> 0:04:36.240 and the data needed to translate this information. Yeah, and 0:04:36.600 --> 0:04:39.760 again this probably doesn't work as well, or almost certainly 0:04:39.800 --> 0:04:42.760 doesn't work as well once the image has more complexity 0:04:42.839 --> 0:04:45.200 to it. Especially, I think it makes a difference, you know, 0:04:45.240 --> 0:04:47.880 once you consider talking talking about like the moving of 0:04:47.920 --> 0:04:50.200 the focus of the eyes and all this. But you know, 0:04:50.279 --> 0:04:53.040 you can represent parts of the retina, parts of the 0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:57.279 visual field within a sort of uh a map of 0:04:57.360 --> 0:05:00.760 the visual processing center of the brain. Uh. And I 0:05:01.040 --> 0:05:03.560 didn't know this before, so thank you so much for sharing, Alex. 0:05:03.600 --> 0:05:06.839 This is really interesting. I still don't think this would 0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:12.920 really make thoughtography anymore plausible, because, I mean, there are 0:05:12.960 --> 0:05:17.520 multiple problems. Uh. Photography tends to project images as you 0:05:17.520 --> 0:05:20.000 would take with a camera. And again this is not 0:05:20.360 --> 0:05:24.560 you're You're not getting maps on the brain projecting complex images. 0:05:24.600 --> 0:05:28.080 It's more sort of like rough correlations of areas of 0:05:28.080 --> 0:05:31.039 the brain to parts of shapes that you would look at. 0:05:32.040 --> 0:05:34.920 But and then also like how would the signal escape 0:05:34.960 --> 0:05:37.320 the skull. The fact that people tended to do it 0:05:37.680 --> 0:05:39.640 at a distance or with the thing in the front 0:05:39.640 --> 0:05:41.760 of the head instead of in the back. I think 0:05:41.760 --> 0:05:44.360 they're there are multiple reasons for saying that this, this 0:05:44.440 --> 0:05:48.200 doesn't really make photography anymore plausible unless you were to say, 0:05:48.440 --> 0:05:51.720 remove the skull and only look at extremely simple shapes 0:05:51.800 --> 0:05:56.960 and accept very distorted versions of them as you're projected image. Well, 0:05:57.000 --> 0:05:59.159 and it reminds me to how we've talked in the 0:05:59.200 --> 0:06:01.960 past about how, you know, a lot of times we're 0:06:01.960 --> 0:06:05.520 reaching for an idea of how psychic transmission of ideas 0:06:05.760 --> 0:06:08.320 could occur, how I can get the contents of my 0:06:08.440 --> 0:06:11.280 skull into your skull. And then we overlooked the fact 0:06:11.279 --> 0:06:15.720 that we have this thing called language that does exactly that. Uh, so, yeah, 0:06:15.720 --> 0:06:21.520 this might be just another bridge between minds, this one 0:06:21.560 --> 0:06:25.640 though technological as opposed to linguistic exactly. Uh, Robert, do 0:06:25.640 --> 0:06:27.360 you mind if I jump onto the next one, because 0:06:27.360 --> 0:06:29.960 it's kind of related. So we were talking about the 0:06:30.040 --> 0:06:32.039 question it was raised in one of the papers we 0:06:32.080 --> 0:06:37.159 looked at of whether mental imagery could be unconsciously perceived. 0:06:37.360 --> 0:06:40.640 Can you picture something without being conscious of perceiving it? 0:06:40.800 --> 0:06:43.680 This is a strange question, And Robert, you said, well, wait, 0:06:43.880 --> 0:06:47.279 could you even see something in with regular vision without 0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:49.680 being conscious of it? And I answered that I thought 0:06:49.680 --> 0:06:52.159 there was some evidence for this, like in the invisible 0:06:52.200 --> 0:06:54.400 guerilla line of research. I seemed to recall there were 0:06:54.440 --> 0:06:57.880 some things where like people wouldn't consciously note seeing a guerrilla, 0:06:58.000 --> 0:07:00.360 but then they might be primed on the subject of 0:07:00.400 --> 0:07:03.600 guerrillas afterwards, so like maybe some part of them had 0:07:03.640 --> 0:07:06.200 seen it, but they weren't conscious of seeing it. But 0:07:06.360 --> 0:07:09.440 after recording the episode, some listeners brought up the condition, 0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:11.320 and I also thought of the condition that that I 0:07:11.320 --> 0:07:14.480 should have mentioned there, which is blind site, which we 0:07:14.560 --> 0:07:16.480 definitely should have thought of because we're both big fans 0:07:16.480 --> 0:07:19.000 of the Peter Wattson novel where he invokes the concept. 0:07:19.320 --> 0:07:23.320 But basically, blind site is a neurological condition in which 0:07:23.360 --> 0:07:28.320 people can respond to visual stimuli behaviorally, and yet they 0:07:28.360 --> 0:07:31.760 believe they are blind or blind in some particular part 0:07:31.800 --> 0:07:34.640 of their visual field. So like you can, I don't know, 0:07:35.000 --> 0:07:37.520 for example, somebody could toss a ball at you and 0:07:37.560 --> 0:07:40.720 you could reach up and catch it, but you are 0:07:40.960 --> 0:07:43.760 but you are not conscious of seeing the ball, like 0:07:43.800 --> 0:07:47.360 you don't believe you can see it or have seen it. Yeah, yeah, 0:07:47.400 --> 0:07:49.200 I mean certainly with the ball. I think we've all 0:07:49.240 --> 0:07:52.440 had that, that situation where you're just suddenly catching the 0:07:52.440 --> 0:07:54.720 ball or I've had. I had that situation when my 0:07:54.760 --> 0:07:57.400 son was younger, where he he fell off of some 0:07:57.400 --> 0:08:01.280 playground equipment and suddenly I was like holding him the foot, Uh, 0:08:01.360 --> 0:08:04.960 you know where it's It's just another in another part 0:08:05.000 --> 0:08:08.920 of our mental machinery is kicking in to make that possible. Yes, 0:08:09.040 --> 0:08:10.840 And so what I think this means is that it 0:08:10.840 --> 0:08:14.240 seems to me the brain is perfectly capable of processing 0:08:14.320 --> 0:08:18.280 visual imagery and reacting in some cases in some ways 0:08:18.320 --> 0:08:22.640 without making that imagery available to the conscious part of 0:08:22.640 --> 0:08:25.800 the brain that talks. So Yes, I think there's definitely 0:08:25.880 --> 0:08:29.720 evidence that it's possible to see unconsciously with regular vision. 0:08:30.040 --> 0:08:33.199 But that still leaves the other question unanswered, whether it's 0:08:33.200 --> 0:08:38.360 possible to imagine visual imagery unconsciously? Can you picture Garfield 0:08:38.400 --> 0:08:42.360 without knowing your picturing Garfield? And our next email addresses this. 0:08:45.280 --> 0:08:48.680 So this is from our listener Tanya. Tanya says, Hey, guys, 0:08:48.720 --> 0:08:52.440 you mentioned the question can mental imagery be unconscious? I 0:08:52.559 --> 0:08:56.200 have some experience concerning this question. Sometimes, when I read 0:08:56.240 --> 0:08:59.200 a novel or play a rather boring game on the computer, 0:08:59.760 --> 0:09:02.400 I suddenly become aware that my mind was busy the 0:09:02.480 --> 0:09:05.680 last hour with understanding what I read and in the 0:09:05.760 --> 0:09:10.720 same time picturing something completely unrelated. Normally it's a landscape 0:09:10.760 --> 0:09:13.360 of some sort, something I know more or less well, 0:09:13.920 --> 0:09:16.360 I move in this area, similar to the movement you 0:09:16.400 --> 0:09:18.960 do when you use Google street View. I had this 0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:22.160 experience long before Google and its maps was invented. Uh. 0:09:22.240 --> 0:09:24.720 The pictures I produce are not put into words, but 0:09:24.800 --> 0:09:28.440 stay completely visual until I become aware. Therefore, I would 0:09:28.520 --> 0:09:31.880 call them unconscious. It happens that I come to places 0:09:31.920 --> 0:09:34.319 I haven't been to physically in years, but as soon 0:09:34.360 --> 0:09:37.280 as I see them again, I remember having been there 0:09:37.360 --> 0:09:41.200 recently in my mind. Oh that's interesting, kind of creepy feeling. 0:09:41.679 --> 0:09:45.120 But in the moment of picturing them, I was completely unaware. 0:09:45.640 --> 0:09:49.480 Sometimes I'm astounded how inaccurate my inner maps are, Like 0:09:49.520 --> 0:09:54.880 all memories are, I guess. Fascinated listener from Germany Tanya. Interesting. Yeah, 0:09:55.200 --> 0:09:57.320 So this this whole idea, and I think this is 0:09:57.360 --> 0:09:59.839 why it was so perplexing when we talked about it 0:09:59.880 --> 0:10:02.080 the first time. Is we really have to figure out 0:10:02.120 --> 0:10:05.640 what we mean by being conscious of seeing something or 0:10:05.720 --> 0:10:09.360 conscious of having a visual image of it. Does that 0:10:09.440 --> 0:10:12.600 mean that I are we just talking about? Uh? It 0:10:12.679 --> 0:10:16.079 occurring at all, are we talking about me having uh, 0:10:16.120 --> 0:10:19.640 like a focused awareness of it, you know, uh, And 0:10:19.720 --> 0:10:22.439 I feel like there's there's sort of room on a 0:10:22.480 --> 0:10:26.520 scale between the two. Yeah, I mean it's kind of hazy. 0:10:26.520 --> 0:10:29.360 I understand what Tanya is talking about here, like having 0:10:29.440 --> 0:10:34.200 the idea that you retrospectively remember that you were thinking 0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:36.800 about something, but you don't have the impression that you 0:10:36.800 --> 0:10:39.280 were conscious of thinking about it when you were thinking 0:10:39.320 --> 0:10:42.079 about it. Well, like, like, here's a question when you're 0:10:42.120 --> 0:10:44.960 in the shower and you're having like shower thoughts, like, 0:10:45.120 --> 0:10:48.160 are you conscious of those thoughts? Is this there's it's 0:10:48.200 --> 0:10:52.959 not directed cognition perhaps, you know, but it's I wouldn't 0:10:52.960 --> 0:10:55.840 say that I am unconscious when I'm having you know, 0:10:56.120 --> 0:10:59.320 various images and ideas rolling through my head, or if 0:10:59.360 --> 0:11:03.800 I'm you know, staring off into space and daydreaming. Um. Yeah, 0:11:03.840 --> 0:11:06.320 I mean it's weird. We almost think of consciousness is 0:11:06.960 --> 0:11:11.000 is like the definitive property of directed cognition, right, But like, 0:11:11.720 --> 0:11:14.520 if you are thinking about something, it's almost implied that 0:11:14.720 --> 0:11:18.280 necessarily it's conscious, but maybe not. I don't know. Consciousness 0:11:18.320 --> 0:11:20.559 is so weird again, It's well, let's move on to 0:11:20.640 --> 0:11:22.520 the next listener mail that Karney has for us, because 0:11:22.559 --> 0:11:27.280 this will add even more fuel to the fire. All right, 0:11:27.320 --> 0:11:30.120 this one comes to us from Windy. Windy rides in 0:11:30.200 --> 0:11:34.240 and says, hi, guys, First, the democ Oregan episode was tremendous. Second, 0:11:34.520 --> 0:11:38.520 you can definitely unconsciously envisioned things I always thought I 0:11:38.559 --> 0:11:41.560 thought in words, mostly until I started meditating. I was 0:11:41.600 --> 0:11:44.920 surprised to realize that there was a background of images 0:11:44.960 --> 0:11:48.720 accompanying the monologue. They impacted and augmented what I thought, 0:11:48.920 --> 0:11:51.880 and I had no idea they were there. Meditation is neat, 0:11:52.160 --> 0:11:56.160 So I love it that they brought up meditation because 0:11:56.200 --> 0:11:57.880 that's also one of the things that I thought about, 0:11:58.000 --> 0:12:01.960 the idea that, yes, when I engaging in a meditative state, 0:12:02.760 --> 0:12:06.560 I will sometimes have well, very often, I think, have 0:12:07.200 --> 0:12:13.359 engaged with visual imagery that arises, you know, um unsummoned, 0:12:13.559 --> 0:12:17.160 you know. But when I really get down and start 0:12:17.200 --> 0:12:20.480 thinking about it again, I'm asking myself, well, does that 0:12:20.559 --> 0:12:23.480 mean that that I am unconscious of this image? Like 0:12:23.520 --> 0:12:26.400 I am, I am aware of the imagery taking place. 0:12:26.559 --> 0:12:29.560 It is, it is perceived by me, even if it 0:12:29.600 --> 0:12:32.680 feels like I am less in control of it. But 0:12:32.880 --> 0:12:36.760 does that mean that it's somehow always back there. It 0:12:36.800 --> 0:12:38.640 gets gets really tricky. I feel like we end up 0:12:38.640 --> 0:12:40.960 in a situation where we can't really see the forest 0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:42.720 for the trees, you know, we get into that blind 0:12:42.760 --> 0:12:45.480 brain effect. And to come back to meditation, I mean, 0:12:45.480 --> 0:12:49.360 of course, when you're meditation is all about awareness and 0:12:49.440 --> 0:12:54.800 about consciousness and changing the way that your awareness is focused, 0:12:55.080 --> 0:12:57.920 taking it, you know, away from these things that you 0:12:57.920 --> 0:13:01.120 would normally miss and focusing on something that is there 0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:06.760 here in the present. Yeah, alright, here's another one. This 0:13:06.800 --> 0:13:10.600 one comes to us from Skylar. Hey, guys, Skyler from Kansas. 0:13:10.640 --> 0:13:13.680 Just finished listening to Burned from the Mind's Eye Part 0:13:13.720 --> 0:13:16.400 two and the end. What you talked about a neural 0:13:16.440 --> 0:13:19.520 network being able to draw mental images was really great. 0:13:19.679 --> 0:13:23.080 It reminded me of a YouTube channel called data Bots. 0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:26.600 It's d A d A dotta bots. I guess not 0:13:26.800 --> 0:13:30.560 like data where a neural network is creating live death 0:13:30.600 --> 0:13:35.520 metal and jazz music. Seven. I've actually heard this. Yeah, yeah, 0:13:35.600 --> 0:13:40.120 it's like AI generated death metal that's just streamed constantly. 0:13:40.480 --> 0:13:43.920 Is it death metal jazz? Is that? I think these 0:13:43.920 --> 0:13:46.880 are two different things, maybe two different channels. Yeah, maybe 0:13:47.400 --> 0:13:50.240 the one I heard it sounded kind of like like 0:13:50.440 --> 0:13:53.560 MS sugar, you know, sort of more a tonal, but 0:13:54.160 --> 0:13:56.600 they're definitely funk elements in sugar though, But I don't 0:13:56.600 --> 0:13:59.600 know about I don't know about jazz. Um Okay, well 0:13:59.600 --> 0:14:03.080 this is the sounds interesting anyway, Scotler continues. The longer 0:14:03.120 --> 0:14:05.560 I listened to it, the crazier and more real the 0:14:05.640 --> 0:14:08.760 music sounds. Just thought you would like that, love the show, 0:14:08.840 --> 0:14:11.600 keep it up. This is interesting because it touches on 0:14:12.840 --> 0:14:16.079 I think this this really intriguing idea of the future 0:14:16.360 --> 0:14:19.920 of creative AI, and that is that not that you 0:14:19.920 --> 0:14:22.280 would have a machine that makes all your death metal 0:14:22.800 --> 0:14:24.680 or a machine that makes all your jazz, it writes 0:14:24.680 --> 0:14:28.200 all your books, etcetera. Um, I you know, maybe we'll 0:14:28.240 --> 0:14:30.000 get to that point. But I think the more exciting 0:14:30.640 --> 0:14:34.920 idea is that, of course you have humans using AI 0:14:35.000 --> 0:14:39.880 to augment their existing talents and creative ideas. So someone 0:14:39.960 --> 0:14:43.080 saying I want to make a jazzy death metal album, Um, 0:14:43.120 --> 0:14:45.640 but I want to I want to break free from 0:14:45.680 --> 0:14:48.000 sort of the you know, the boxes that are enclosing 0:14:48.040 --> 0:14:51.480 me here, and then you might turn to creative AI 0:14:51.520 --> 0:14:54.280 as a way to sort of discover where you could 0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:57.200 break free and also then be able to rein it 0:14:57.240 --> 0:14:59.040 in and say, well, I don't really want to go 0:14:59.040 --> 0:15:01.120 in this direction or this action, but here's a direction 0:15:01.320 --> 0:15:03.920 I never even thought off before. You could almost use 0:15:04.080 --> 0:15:07.640 AI kind of like a creative each ing or something, 0:15:07.720 --> 0:15:11.200 you know, like introducing elements of of random input for 0:15:11.240 --> 0:15:14.200 you to sort through and make your own sense of. Yeah. Yeah, 0:15:14.360 --> 0:15:18.840 And of course there have been creative methodologies like that 0:15:18.880 --> 0:15:21.920 performer reminded of the cut Up Machine exactly approach to 0:15:21.960 --> 0:15:28.200 fiction totally. All right. So this next message comes in 0:15:28.280 --> 0:15:31.280 response to our episode I Drink Your Blood Type, which 0:15:31.880 --> 0:15:34.000 which had one of our favorite skits in a while, 0:15:34.040 --> 0:15:37.760 I think about the Blood Club. Yeah, and then it 0:15:37.840 --> 0:15:40.560 was about blood types and also about the idea of 0:15:41.360 --> 0:15:44.760 people believing in blood type personality correlations like some of 0:15:44.840 --> 0:15:47.960 the blood type horoscopes and things blood blood type diets 0:15:48.040 --> 0:15:50.600 and so forth. This was a really great piece of 0:15:50.600 --> 0:15:54.640 feedback from our listener Annie. She says, Hey, guys, I 0:15:54.680 --> 0:15:56.520 love the show, and I just listened to the episode 0:15:56.520 --> 0:15:59.480 on blood. Being a geneticist and neuroscientist, I thought I 0:15:59.480 --> 0:16:01.560 would add my two cents worth in relation to your 0:16:01.600 --> 0:16:05.440 comments about blood type being linked to certain personality traits. 0:16:05.720 --> 0:16:09.760 While blood type is simply inherited by a single gene, locusts. 0:16:10.120 --> 0:16:13.840 Personality is complex and is an interaction of many genes 0:16:13.840 --> 0:16:17.680 and environment. Certain learned behaviors can be passed down through 0:16:17.720 --> 0:16:20.920 families and in fact by different populations or ethnic groups 0:16:20.960 --> 0:16:23.960 at the same time as blood groups are inherited, so 0:16:24.080 --> 0:16:28.320 by pure coincidence due to specific personality traits of population groups, 0:16:28.560 --> 0:16:31.760 both blood type and these traits may track together. In 0:16:31.760 --> 0:16:34.040 this case, the two would be correlated with each other, 0:16:34.080 --> 0:16:36.600 but there's no evidence that one will cause the other. 0:16:37.040 --> 0:16:40.280 The other way blood groups could possibly follow inherited personality 0:16:40.320 --> 0:16:43.600 traits is if the genes are inherited together on the chromosome, 0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:45.880 and this is more likely to happen if the genes 0:16:45.920 --> 0:16:49.240 are closer in proximity on the chromosome, thus having less 0:16:49.320 --> 0:16:52.320 chance of being separated during the stages of crossing over. 0:16:52.400 --> 0:16:56.000 During myosis, the blood group gene is on the long 0:16:56.200 --> 0:17:00.600 arm of chromosome nine. Interestingly, a genetic mutation making one 0:17:00.640 --> 0:17:04.040 more susceptible to a certain type of dementia. C nine 0:17:04.040 --> 0:17:07.200 O r F seventy two is also on chromosome nine, 0:17:07.400 --> 0:17:10.400 albeit on the other end of the chromosome, thus requiring 0:17:10.440 --> 0:17:13.159 an even number of crossings over to allow them to 0:17:13.200 --> 0:17:17.040 be inherited together. This form of dementia can cause behavioral 0:17:17.119 --> 0:17:21.160 variations which may cause personality changes decades before the dementia 0:17:21.200 --> 0:17:24.800 sets in. Finally, in regards to the comment about personality 0:17:24.880 --> 0:17:27.800 being related to the gut microbiome, uh, and this was 0:17:27.840 --> 0:17:29.879 when we were talking about the plausibility of the thing. 0:17:29.920 --> 0:17:32.439 We didn't think that that the blood type predictor of 0:17:32.480 --> 0:17:36.080 personality was very plausible, but we did say there's a 0:17:36.080 --> 0:17:39.040 surface level kind of plausibility because you know, things about 0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:43.960 the gut microbiome can predict personality, at least potentially. Uh So, so, Uh, 0:17:44.600 --> 0:17:47.800 it might seem to people why couldn't the blood predicted 0:17:47.840 --> 0:17:51.360 as well? Uh? But any continues about the gut microbiome. 0:17:51.800 --> 0:17:54.320 This is much more feasible since the biota in the 0:17:54.359 --> 0:17:58.800 gut produced neurotransmitters which can affect mood and personality, and 0:17:58.880 --> 0:18:01.720 the stems from in reology, when the gut and spinal 0:18:01.760 --> 0:18:04.840 cord were in fact one organ called the neural crest. 0:18:05.359 --> 0:18:08.720 The neural crest separates early during development, but the resulting 0:18:08.760 --> 0:18:12.440 gut and central nervous system are still closely linked during life, 0:18:12.520 --> 0:18:15.119 as can be seen when we get gut reactions to 0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:18.440 certain brain stimuli. And we are now starting to see 0:18:18.480 --> 0:18:20.959 evidence of how the types of foods we eat affect 0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:24.040 the gut microbiome, which in turn can affect our mood 0:18:24.160 --> 0:18:27.159 and general state of mind. Looking forward to continuing to 0:18:27.200 --> 0:18:30.680 having my mind blown by you all the best, Annie, Well, 0:18:30.680 --> 0:18:33.400 it was great to have a geneticist and neuroscientists chime 0:18:33.440 --> 0:18:36.240 in on that. Oh yeah, I always love when when 0:18:36.280 --> 0:18:38.840 you'll let their share your expertise with us. All right, 0:18:38.880 --> 0:18:40.640 On that note, I think we should probably take our 0:18:40.640 --> 0:18:43.680 first break, but when we come back, we will turn 0:18:43.800 --> 0:18:50.760 flesh into salt. Thank thank Alright, we're back all right now. 0:18:50.800 --> 0:18:54.679 This next message concerned some episodes that came before Halloween, 0:18:55.119 --> 0:18:57.840 but since it also touches on some Halloween e stuff, 0:18:58.680 --> 0:19:00.920 I think we're throwing it in with Halloween. Lat Yeah, 0:19:00.960 --> 0:19:03.800 but plus the non Halloween episodes that they touched on 0:19:03.800 --> 0:19:05.880 are also at least a little bit HALLOWEENI I mean, 0:19:06.040 --> 0:19:08.720 you know how it goes. But this listener has written 0:19:08.720 --> 0:19:11.639 in before and always sends great messages. This is from Jesser. 0:19:14.320 --> 0:19:16.800 Jesse writes, Hey, guys, I wanted to write in to 0:19:16.880 --> 0:19:19.359 share some thoughts on some recent episodes, along with a 0:19:19.400 --> 0:19:22.960 little bit of monster history since it's getting close to October. 0:19:23.359 --> 0:19:25.800 In the Flesh into Salt episodes, you talked about how 0:19:25.880 --> 0:19:29.359 Lot's wife might have been inspired by natural formations, But 0:19:29.560 --> 0:19:31.840 what could have been the inspiration for the story of 0:19:31.880 --> 0:19:34.199 Sodom and go Mora as a whole. While I'm not 0:19:34.240 --> 0:19:36.560 a scholar of the Hebrew Bible, I have a theory 0:19:36.880 --> 0:19:39.840 it's a bit of Bronze Age sci fi, going off 0:19:39.840 --> 0:19:43.359 of Isaac Asimov's definition of sci fi as stories which 0:19:43.400 --> 0:19:46.760 deal with human response to new technology. Maybe Sodom and 0:19:46.760 --> 0:19:50.840 Gomorrah is a pastoral culture's idea of city has gone 0:19:50.880 --> 0:19:55.119 too far, where urbanization has destroyed the custom of hospitality. 0:19:55.480 --> 0:19:58.560 If you start looking at Hebrew Bible stories through this lens, 0:19:58.800 --> 0:20:01.359 the Tower of Babble Become is a cautionary tale about 0:20:01.400 --> 0:20:04.879 monumental buildings, Shadrack Mishak and a Ben to Go a 0:20:04.920 --> 0:20:09.200 story about smelting furnaces taken too far, and Joseph interpreting 0:20:09.200 --> 0:20:12.520 the Pharaoh's dreams at parable about the importance of storing 0:20:12.600 --> 0:20:16.640 surplus grain. These stories would have entered the oral tradition 0:20:16.720 --> 0:20:19.879 when these ideas were still new then preserved when written 0:20:19.920 --> 0:20:23.080 down as religious text. This is all speculation, but ancient 0:20:23.160 --> 0:20:26.240 people's could have expressed their anxieties about new technologies through 0:20:26.280 --> 0:20:30.520 stories the same way we do today. I love this idea. 0:20:30.600 --> 0:20:33.159 I mean again, this is it's speculative. You can't like 0:20:33.280 --> 0:20:35.560 know this is the case, really, but you could look 0:20:35.560 --> 0:20:37.879 for clues in this and the stories. Maybe. I I 0:20:38.240 --> 0:20:41.320 like the idea that a lot of Bible stories and 0:20:41.400 --> 0:20:45.040 traditional myths might in fact be like three thousand year 0:20:45.040 --> 0:20:48.359 old episodes of Black Mirror. Yeah. I mean, what do 0:20:48.400 --> 0:20:51.320 we know about about the way we think about the 0:20:51.359 --> 0:20:54.919 passage of time. We know that, yes, we are always 0:20:55.080 --> 0:20:58.240 anxious about new technologies as they have presented. Uh, the 0:20:58.280 --> 0:21:02.800 older generation is always suspicious of the younger generation and 0:21:02.960 --> 0:21:06.200 or fearful of them. We know that technology has profound 0:21:06.200 --> 0:21:09.520 effects on culture, that changes culture constantly. Yeah. So I 0:21:09.520 --> 0:21:12.440 mean this, You know, on on the surface, this sounds 0:21:12.840 --> 0:21:15.000 very plausible. And now I don't know to what extend. 0:21:15.040 --> 0:21:19.439 Anyone has ever explored the concept of certainly of of 0:21:19.520 --> 0:21:24.080 mythology and folklore as as sort of primitive science fiction 0:21:24.240 --> 0:21:27.600 or prescience fiction sci fi. But I would be interested 0:21:27.600 --> 0:21:30.679 to learn more about about how this might work. This 0:21:30.680 --> 0:21:33.880 sounds like this could be a fascinating book, and if 0:21:33.880 --> 0:21:38.199 it hasn't already been written, alright, so um Jesser continues quote, 0:21:38.240 --> 0:21:40.840 I also have a thought about a part of what 0:21:41.000 --> 0:21:44.200 makes the vantage Mind manuscripts so alluring. It's the fact 0:21:44.320 --> 0:21:46.479 that it's so mundane. You expect a hoax or an 0:21:46.520 --> 0:21:50.200 invention to be more flamboyant, to call more attention to itself. 0:21:50.400 --> 0:21:53.359 But as strange as the manuscript is, it doesn't go anywhere. 0:21:53.520 --> 0:21:56.440 In fact, it seems to get less interesting towards the end, 0:21:56.440 --> 0:21:59.639 where you'd expect some sort of punchline or absurd conclusion. 0:22:00.960 --> 0:22:02.560 This is This is a great point. I think this 0:22:02.600 --> 0:22:06.120 is one of the reasons that um House of Leaves 0:22:06.680 --> 0:22:09.760 is so so convincing at times, because I had that 0:22:09.800 --> 0:22:12.240 experience where I felt that it towards the end it 0:22:12.240 --> 0:22:17.280 gets more just reference referential, you know, and and perhaps 0:22:17.359 --> 0:22:19.359 less engaging, but in a way that makes it more 0:22:19.960 --> 0:22:23.560 it feels more authentic in that regard. Yeah, totally, they continue. 0:22:23.880 --> 0:22:27.880