Weak Vampires?
Michael Grosberg
visual media. We've encountered good vampires, bad vampires, ones that
are susceptible or not to garlic, crosses, sunlight or wooden stakes.
Some have to be invited in, others disregard this piece of lore. Some
are fantasy creatures. Others have contracted some virus or have
altered genes. Some need human blood, others can sustain themselves on
animal blood. Some are sexy, some are ugly.
I was wondering what is the minimum requirement for still being called
a vampire. Obviously the one common theme in all vampire fiction is
that they have to drink blood. But the other recurrent theme is that
vampires are harder to kill and they are faster and physically
stronger than ordinary humans. Vampires, in other words, are top
predators.
this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
il...@rcn.com
> vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
> groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
I know of one. The book "365 scary stories" has one short story
written from the point of view of just such a vampire. He is not any
stronger than a human, nor particularly difficult to hurt, and must
use deception to get his prey where it is vulnerable. He is *fast*,
but that's about it -- and still within upper range of human athletes.
llen...@yahoo.com
wrote:
>
> this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
> vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
> groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
vampires have a lot more weaknesses that simply weren't knowable to a
low tech society. According to GrimJack, vampires are repelled by
canned fruits, and are strongly weakened in the presence of tour-bots,
as well as having other unnamed high tech weaknesses.
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<grosberg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
>vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
>groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
Well, not pack hunters, but my vampire in the short story "The Name of
Fear" is pretty ineffective.
--
My webpage is at http://www.watt-evans.com
The seventh issue of Helix is now at http://www.helixsf.com
Aaron Denney
> I was wondering what is the minimum requirement for still being called
> a vampire. Obviously the one common theme in all vampire fiction is
> that they have to drink blood. But the other recurrent theme is that
> vampires are harder to kill and they are faster and physically
> stronger than ordinary humans. Vampires, in other words, are top
> predators.
Well, the drinking blood isn't a hard-and-fast requirement. See, for
example, "The Mindworm" by Cyril Kornbluth, or the White Court vampires
in Jim Butcher's Harry Dresden novels. While these don't suck blood,
they do live off of something less substantial from their victims.
This parasitic consumption of something that it's possible to slowly
lose might be the minimum requirement.
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
William George Ferguson
<grosberg...@gmail.com> wrote:
The vampires in Anderson's Operation Chaos had to depend on sneakiness.
They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up
pretty good by the average human.
--
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
(Bene Gesserit)
Gene Ward Smith
news:7lftt359spsa1qtid...@4ax.com:
> They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up
> pretty good by the average human.
>
Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is not
improved by making them weak.
Andrew Plotkin
>
> The vampires in Anderson's Operation Chaos had to depend on sneakiness.
> They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up
> pretty good by the average human.
Where were those mentioned? I only remember a one-line gag about not
being able to use them around Italian troops.
--Z
--
"And Aholibamah bare Jeush, and Jaalam, and Korah: these were the borogoves..."
*
If the Bush administration hasn't subjected you to searches without a
warrant, it's for one reason: they don't feel like it. Not because of
the Fourth Amendment.
Mike Schilling
What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
Gene Ward Smith
$J41....@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net:
>> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is
>> not improved by making them weak.
>
> What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
>
The situation cannot arise as a result of evolution. Human prey are a very
difficult target, and until the rise of civilizations, were too few to
allow a population of specialized predators anyway. After humans became
numerous, you can imagine specialized predators hiding in our midst,
disguised as us, but you get two questions:
(1) Where the hell did they come from?
(2) Why haven't we noticed they exist?
IsaacKuo
> William George Ferguson <wmgfr...@newsguy.com> wrote innews:7lftt359spsa1qtid...@4ax.com:
> > They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up
> > pretty good by the average human.
> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is not
> improved by making them weak.
Yes, it's terribly implausible for deadly bloodsuckers to
be frail little weaklings that the average human can easily
smash up. Thank goodness for Mansquito.
Isaac Kuo
endy9
episode where Malcolm McDowell plays a weaker vampire "The Relucant
Vampire".
--
Dennis/Endy
http://home.comcast.net/~endymion91/
~I was born to rock the boat. Some will sink but we will float.
Grab your coat. Let's get out of here.
You're my witness. I'm your Mutineer~ - Warren Zevon
Howard Brazee
Rebecca Rice
> There have been many variations on vampires in written fiction and
> visual media. We've encountered good vampires, bad vampires, ones that
> are susceptible or not to garlic, crosses, sunlight or wooden stakes.
> Some have to be invited in, others disregard this piece of lore. Some
> are fantasy creatures. Others have contracted some virus or have
> altered genes. Some need human blood, others can sustain themselves on
> animal blood. Some are sexy, some are ugly.
>
> I was wondering what is the minimum requirement for still being called
> a vampire. Obviously the one common theme in all vampire fiction is
> that they have to drink blood.
There are stories about psi vamps... vampires that feed on
emotions, not blood. And about some that live on "life
essences", but there you are get a blurred boundary between
vampires and succubi/inccubi. So your minimum requirement
isn't quite so clean cut as you might think!
Rebecca
Dave Hansen
wrote:
[...]
> this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
> vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
> groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
The inhumu of Gene Wolfe's Long Sun and Short Sun series are pretty
insubstantial, and have to work primarily through subterfuge. But
they're not really "vampires," depending on how you want to define the
word...
Regards,
-=Dave
David Goldfarb
IsaacKuo <mec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>On Mar 17, 2:39=A0pm, Gene Ward Smith <g...@chewbacca.org> wrote:
>> William George Ferguson <wmgfr...@newsguy.com> wrote innews:7lftt359spsa1q=
>tidb47qfo5...@4ax.com:
>
>> > They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up=
>
>> > pretty good by the average human.
>
>> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is not
>> improved by making them weak.
>
>Yes, it's terribly implausible for deadly bloodsuckers to
>be frail little weaklings that the average human can easily
>smash up. Thank goodness for Mansquito.
I think there's a distinction to be made between "predator"
and "parasite".
--
David Goldfarb |"Regrets by definition come too late.
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | Say what you mean. Bear witness. Iterate."
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu | -- John M. Ford
Kurt Busiek
> In article <23e397ea-9e70-4a6e...@p73g2000hsd.googlegroups.com>,
> IsaacKuo <mec...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On Mar 17, 2:39=A0pm, Gene Ward Smith <g...@chewbacca.org> wrote:
>>> William George Ferguson <wmgfr...@newsguy.com> wrote innews:7lftt359spsa1q=
>> tidb47qfo5...@4ax.com:
>>
>>>> They were strong, but very light (hollow-boned), and could be smashed up=
>>
>>>> pretty good by the average human.
>>
>>> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is not
>>> improved by making them weak.
>>
>> Yes, it's terribly implausible for deadly bloodsuckers to
>> be frail little weaklings that the average human can easily
>> smash up. Thank goodness for Mansquito.
>
> I think there's a distinction to be made between "predator"
> and "parasite".
Sure, but mosquitos don't benefit from a prolonged, close association
with a single host, so they're not parasites. They don't kill and eat
their prey, either, but they do prey on humans.
They're "grazing" predators, if you're going to make the distinction.
kdb
David DeLaney
>Michael Grosberg <grosberg.mich...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
>> vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
>> groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
>
>The inhumu of Gene Wolfe's Long Sun and Short Sun series are pretty
>insubstantial, and have to work primarily through subterfuge. But
>they're not really "vampires," depending on how you want to define the word...
How many people will run screaming into the night if I whisper "sime/gen"?
Dave "where the weakness was not at first apparent" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Steve Harclerode
Dracula", is there some collection of just your stories that might have it?
thanks,
Steve
"Lawrence Watt-Evans" <l...@sff.net> wrote in message
news:k75tt3l3sstu21sh2...@news.rcn.com...
Lawrence Watt-Evans
<Camel.So...@hot.mail.com> wrote:
>I'd like to read that one. The only book I see it in is "The Ultimate
>Dracula", is there some collection of just your stories that might have it?
Not yet.
Par
> > What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
> >
>
> The situation cannot arise as a result of evolution.
Predators change prey as available niches change.
> Human prey are a very
> difficult target, and until the rise of civilizations, were too few to
> allow a population of specialized predators anyway.
Not really. it all depends on what the requirements are of the predator
relative to the prey population. If the prey population can support a
breeding population of the predator (i.e. you are more likley to find
them in China than on Easter Island) then there is no reason they could
not appear.
Assume that the net annual productivity of a human population is P(h).
Assume that one vampire needs N humans annualy to sustain itself. Assume
that the minimal stable breeding vampire population is Pmin(v). Then we
can easilly calculate the size of human population that will support a
stable vampire population.
There is a buttload of animals that food on humans, but we
think of them as parasites and nasty microbes, not predators.
> After humans became
> numerous, you can imagine specialized predators hiding in our midst,
> disguised as us, but you get two questions:
>
> (1) Where the hell did they come from?
Earlier they were preying on monkeys in the jungle, but as people became
more plentifull than monkeys some of them changed prey. Then we perhaps
had a sympatric speciation event, and the modern vampire evolved.
> (2) Why haven't we noticed they exist?
Because they are good at it? Have we looked for them? Sure, we wouild
have noticed if tens of freshlyn drained corpses turned up in London
each night, but what if 5% of the brain cancer incidence is explained by
vampires draining the <mumble> from the victims mind?
/Par
--
Par use...@hunter-gatherer.org
"Errors have been made. Others will be blamed.
Gene Ward Smith
news:slrnftuloq...@hunter-gatherer.org:
> Gene Ward Smith <ge...@chewbacca.org>:
>> > What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
>> >
>>
>> The situation cannot arise as a result of evolution.
>
> Predators change prey as available niches change.
Vampires are usually depicted as obligate predators on humans, though
admittedly not in a way which makes any biological sense. If they are not,
then they won't be predators on humans at all under most circumstances,
since it's a lousy idea. And if they are really mostly powered by magic,
all bets are off.
>> Human prey are a very
>> difficult target, and until the rise of civilizations, were too few to
>> allow a population of specialized predators anyway.
>
> Not really. it all depends on what the requirements are of the predator
> relative to the prey population. If the prey population can support a
> breeding population of the predator (i.e. you are more likley to find
> them in China than on Easter Island) then there is no reason they could
> not appear.
The point is, until relatively recent times the prey population could not
support a breeding population of predators. And even today, it would get
noticed.
> There is a buttload of animals that food on humans, but we
> think of them as parasites and nasty microbes, not predators.
And if all vampires need to do is sneak around and get a few occasional
milliliters of human blood under the cover of magic, they might get away
with it. How is that going to work scientifically?
>> After humans became
>> numerous, you can imagine specialized predators hiding in our midst,
>> disguised as us, but you get two questions:
>>
>> (1) Where the hell did they come from?
>
> Earlier they were preying on monkeys in the jungle, but as people became
> more plentifull than monkeys some of them changed prey.
Sort of like the way leopards and jaguars did? Because humans, as is well
known, are dead easy. But why, then, are they stuck with humans?
David DeLaney
>Par <use...@hunter-gatherer.org> wrote in
>> relative to the prey population. If the prey population can support a
>> breeding population of the predator (i.e. you are more likley to find
>> them in China than on Easter Island) then there is no reason they could
>> not appear.
>
>The point is, until relatively recent times the prey population could not
>support a breeding population of predators. And even today, it would get
>noticed.
Though much depends on the time periods involved in both 'breeding' and the
lifespan of the predator. If they really do have the ability to live for
millenia if not squashed by accidents, and if making a new vamp is fairly
rare, _and_ if they have enough tricks amassed to avoid many avoidable
accidents - then they can breed fairly slowly and still sustain themselves,
leading to a much smaller "breeding population" than one might expect. (The
trope of one or two vampires per city might work fairly well, for example.)
This also is helped if they don't need to predate very often; one human a month
going missing in a city is much more likely to be lost in the pre-industrial
noise than one a night. Etc.
>Sort of like the way leopards and jaguars did? Because humans, as is well
>known, are dead easy. But why, then, are they stuck with humans?
More magic; once you talk smack, you never go back?
Dave
Gene Ward Smith
news:slrnftv4d...@gatekeeper.vic.com:
> Though much depends on the time periods involved in both 'breeding' and
the
> lifespan of the predator. If they really do have the ability to live for
> millenia if not squashed by accidents, and if making a new vamp is fairly
> rare, _and_ if they have enough tricks amassed to avoid many avoidable
> accidents - then they can breed fairly slowly and still sustain
themselves,
> leading to a much smaller "breeding population" than one might expect.
And how did that evolve? Long generations is going to make it harder to
keeo up with your evolving prey, by the way.
> This also is helped if they don't need to predate very often; one human a
month
> going missing in a city is much more likely to be lost in the pre-
industrial
> noise than one a night. Etc.
Uh huh. Of course, until relatively recently, there were no cities. And how
do you get by feeding once a month--are we talking some sort of reptile?
David DeLaney
>> lifespan of the predator. If they really do have the ability to live for
>> millenia if not squashed by accidents, and if making a new vamp is fairly
>> rare, _and_ if they have enough tricks amassed to avoid many avoidable
>> accidents - then they can breed fairly slowly and still sustain themselves,
>> leading to a much smaller "breeding population" than one might expect.
>
>And how did that evolve? Long generations is going to make it harder to
>keeo up with your evolving prey, by the way.
Eh. So maybe they experience time differently than we. Magic magic magic.
>> This also is helped if they don't need to predate very often; one human a
>month going missing in a city is much more likely to be lost in the pre-
>industrial noise than one a night. Etc.
>
>Uh huh. Of course, until relatively recently, there were no cities. And how
>do you get by feeding once a month--are we talking some sort of reptile?
Perhaps they only need to feed _on hu-man blood_ once a month. An addition to
the menstrual cycle that ended up non-gender specific. And can get by on yummy
radishes, turnips, and bacon the rest of the month.
Until we actually find some, we won't _know_ how it 'works' or how it evolved.
At present, we're missing anything to theorize on outside of archetypal
imaginings, and we may never run into any at all. Doesn't stop people saying
"Well, obviously it SHOULD work like this because that's the most elegant
way of doing it if this magic works like that"...
Mark Zenier
Michael Grosberg <grosberg...@gmail.com> wrote:
...
>I was wondering what is the minimum requirement for still being called
>a vampire. Obviously the one common theme in all vampire fiction is
>that they have to drink blood. But the other recurrent theme is that
>vampires are harder to kill and they are faster and physically
>stronger than ordinary humans. Vampires, in other words, are top
>predators.
>
>this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
>vampires? frail vampires that hide in shadows and have to hunt in
>groups, or use subterfuge, because they are weaker than their prey?
Well, one of the characters in Spider Robinsons "Callahan's
Bar/Saloon(?)" stories meets your qualifications.
(There are many things I don't want or need to remember, this is one
of them).
Mark Zenier mze...@eskimo.com
Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com)
James Nicoll
>support a breeding population of predators. And even today, it would get
>noticed.
Hmmm.
Problem: Prey is rare.
Solution: make vampires much smaller than their prey (Although
not as small as mosquiotoes). Half as tall could mean one eighth the
mass.
New problem: humans can slap pygmy vampires around like they
were kids, because pvs are about the size of children.
Solutions:
1: The smilodon solution. Sabre teeth let cats take down surprisingly
large prey, which is why it keeps re-evolving (But being dependent on large
prey, by definition more prone to population collapses than small, is why
sabre toothed cats keep dying out).
2: The Chimpanzee solution. Human muscle arrangement does not get
the full use of their potential. A man-sized chimp is much stranger than
a man. A small hominid could be much stronger than a similar sized human.
3: The Cuckoo solution. Humans are protective of childen. Look
as much like a kid as possible. In fact, look more like a kid than kids
do, to exploit supernormal responses. Use the befuddled adults who think
the pygmy vampries are their kids to protect them as they chow down on
the local tribe.
1 and 3 may be difficult to make work together.
[Puts aside for use on Trillion Human Earth]
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Hallvard B Furuseth
> Solution: make vampires much smaller than their prey (Although
> not as small as mosquiotoes).
Why not? They are a proven solution to the problem.
--
Hallvard
Robert Carnegie
> "Mike Schilling" <mscottschill...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:2SzDj.32482
> $J41.11...@newssvr14.news.prodigy.net:
>
> >> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is
> >> not improved by making them weak.
>
> > What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
>
> The situation cannot arise as a result of evolution. Human prey are a very
> difficult target, and until the rise of civilizations, were too few to
> allow a population of specialized predators anyway. After humans became
> numerous, you can imagine specialized predators hiding in our midst,
> disguised as us, but you get two questions:
>
> (1) Where the hell did they come from?
>
> (2) Why haven't we noticed they exist?
(1) They're a sub-species of human.
(2) They're invisible. Or they hypnotise us. Or they pass as human.
Or they're incredibly sneaky.
Your typical serial killer, for instance, gets along quietly with his
neighbours.
Having said that... living such a profoundly weird secret life as a
credible vampire would have to, makes it pretty difficult to live
amongst suspicious humans. I think the monstter mostly only gets away
with it in stories because if they didn't, they'd be caught pretty
quick and there'd be no monster and no story, and the author wouldn't
get paid.
See also Harry Potter - why powerful wizards and witches would
successfully hide all magical entities from ordinary humans, instead
of just taking over the world - and then how they would successfully
keep their secrets - it only makes sense if the magic is very powerful
indeed but the administrative skills of the magicians are lamentably
poor (so that running the world isn't an option), or if you accept
that the writer wants to bolt on a world of wizards onto present-day
society and culture and geography, just out of sight from us,
regardless of plausibility.
James Nicoll
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>See also Harry Potter - why powerful wizards and witches would
>successfully hide all magical entities from ordinary humans, instead
>of just taking over the world - and then how they would successfully
>keep their secrets - it only makes sense if the magic is very powerful
>indeed but the administrative skills of the magicians are lamentably
>poor
This is not ruled out by the text.
It's also clear that magical ability has nothing to do with
being bright, although being bright can be an asset for using what
magical ability one has.
David Cowie
> A man-sized chimp is much stranger than a man.
I know that it's bad form to comment on typos, but sometimes you just
can't resist.
--
David Cowie
Containment Failure + 38063:19
David DeLaney
>(2) They're invisible. Or they hypnotise us. Or they pass as human.
>Or they're incredibly sneaky.
>
>Your typical serial killer, for instance, gets along quietly with his
>neighbours.
He was a qui-et man;
the neighbors seemed to love him
he al-ways smiled at the children passing by-y-y
No-one could understand
what demons came to shove him
when he pulled the trigger, when the chainsaw started
was it hard to figure, was he broken-hearted?
did the neighbors marvel at the sudden silence
did he hate to carpool? did it lead to violence?
When they close the curtains and they hide inside
do they know for certain if he lived or di-ied?
--Uncle Bonsai, "Men and Women"
Gene Ward Smith
>>And how did that evolve? Long generations is going to make it harder to
>>keeo up with your evolving prey, by the way.
>
> Eh. So maybe they experience time differently than we. Magic magic magic.
>
"Magic" isn't a very useful response when the point is to show that something
isn't scientific idiocy.
Gene Ward Smith
9291-60b...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
> (1) They're a sub-species of human.
>
> (2) They're invisible. Or they hypnotise us. Or they pass as human.
> Or they're incredibly sneaky.
>
And this all evolved how?
William George Ferguson
wrote:
>In article <17567946-c740-40e4...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
>Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>See also Harry Potter - why powerful wizards and witches would
>>successfully hide all magical entities from ordinary humans, instead
>>of just taking over the world - and then how they would successfully
>>keep their secrets - it only makes sense if the magic is very powerful
>>indeed but the administrative skills of the magicians are lamentably
>>poor
>
> This is not ruled out by the text.
>
> It's also clear that magical ability has nothing to do with
>being bright, although being bright can be an asset for using what
>magical ability one has.
Also, the pieces we hear from the History of Magic, especially the pieces
talking about the founding of Hogwarts, makes it clear (though the wizards,
of course, say the reverse), that the wizards basically went into hiding
because they were being killed by the muggles, when the muggles knew abou
them. The wizards are egocentric enough to tell themselves they put all
those rules in place to protect the muggles, but everything we've seen
about the wizards as a group (not necessarily individually, of course) is
that they are not in the least bit altruistic. If they put all those rules
in place 800 or so years ago, it wouldn't have been to protect the muggles
from them, it would have been to protect themselves from the muggles.
It's the same situation generally put forth for the
vampires/werewolves/elves/fill_in_the_blank remaining in hiding. If you
out-power them a hundred to one, but they outnumber you several million to
one, direct confrontation is contra-indicated.
--
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
(Bene Gesserit)
Par
> Uh huh. Of course, until relatively recently, there were no cities. And how
> do you get by feeding once a month--are we talking some sort of reptile?
Why not? This would explain that they are cold to the touch and needs to
feed very seldom. One good meal and you are set for a few months of
torpor in your hideout.
Sure, we are not talking about _rigorous_ biology here, we are talking
about *possible* biological explanation models for a vampire type
creature. Basically the biologist equivalent to recalculating the
physics problems using the well known furlong-fortnight-stone system.
/Par
--
Par use...@hunter-gatherer.org
Mind Like A Steel Trap - Rusty And Illegal In 37 States
Par
> > Predators change prey as available niches change.
>
> Vampires are usually depicted as obligate predators on humans, though
> admittedly not in a way which makes any biological sense. If they are not,
> then they won't be predators on humans at all under most circumstances,
> since it's a lousy idea.
It is a lousy idea because som far we have been able to beat the crap
out of just about every predator we have encountered. But if we posit
that a vampire is really, really good at it the name of the game
changes.
> >> Human prey are a very
> >> difficult target, and until the rise of civilizations, were too few to
> >> allow a population of specialized predators anyway.
> >
> > Not really. it all depends on what the requirements are of the predator
> > relative to the prey population. If the prey population can support a
> > breeding population of the predator (i.e. you are more likley to find
> > them in China than on Easter Island) then there is no reason they could
> > not appear.
>
> The point is, until relatively recent times the prey population could not
> support a breeding population of predators. And even today, it would get
> noticed.
Thst depends on how many humans a vampire needs to kill per year. If we
arte talking about "a few at most", and a species that can support a
very small breeding population.
Idea; it is not actually the vampire that is the predator, it is a
parasite that spreads to new hosts when it is in infectious mode, and in
the rest of the time just alters the hosts behaviour and characteristics
in some way (i.e. making it into a vampire). I think one could argue
for this model without waving ones hands very vigorously. Not something
I expect written up in Nature next month, but not totally out of the
concievable either.
> >> After humans became
> >> numerous, you can imagine specialized predators hiding in our midst,
> >> disguised as us, but you get two questions:
> >>
> >> (1) Where the hell did they come from?
> >
> > Earlier they were preying on monkeys in the jungle, but as people became
> > more plentifull than monkeys some of them changed prey.
>
> Sort of like the way leopards and jaguars did? Because humans, as is well
> known, are dead easy. But why, then, are they stuck with humans?
Something in the higher primate makeup that they need?
/Par
--
Par use...@hunter-gatherer.org
The hills nowadays are populated by folk that use their mobile phone to
call out teh SAR when they snap a shoelace.
-- Andy Woodward
Gene Ward Smith
gatherer.org:
> It is a lousy idea because som far we have been able to beat the crap
> out of just about every predator we have encountered. But if we posit
> that a vampire is really, really good at it the name of the game
> changes.
>
He never gets a chance to be good at it because he doesn't evolve obligate
predation on humans.
James Nicoll
There's always the Wolfen solution: they aren't obligate predators
on humans or at least weren't until habitat encroachment forced them to
hunt new prey. That ssort of thing usually ends badly for the predator.
Come to think of it, one of the interesting things going on in
India as the nation urbanizes is that monkeys are moving into the cities
as well. Right now urban monkey populations are soaring but if the Indians
manage to deal with that [1], predators might consider switching from
monkeys to the next best thing available in huge numbers.
1: I would like to say at this point that the plan where annoying monkey
tribes are driven out by the deliberate introduction of larger, more
aggressive monkeys is a bad, bad idea.
Jeff Stehman
deda67...@i12g2000prf.googlegroups.com>, grosberg...@gmail.com
says...
>
> this in turn got me thinking: did anyone ever write about weak
> vampires?
Weak relative to the protagonist. Early on in _Jack of Shadows_, when
Jack is weak and returning from being dead, he turns the tables on a
vampire hunting him, drinking her blood to gain strength. If I recall
correctly, he noted that she was also in a weakened condition.
--
Jeff Stehman
Derek Lyons
>Having said that... living such a profoundly weird secret life as a
>credible vampire would have to, makes it pretty difficult to live
>amongst suspicious humans.
Why? Humans aren't generally suspicious of every oddity.
D.
--
Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh.
http://derekl1963.livejournal.com/
-Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings.
Oct 5th, 2004 JDL
Aaron Denney
> In article <Xns9A6577EAE4BFge...@207.115.17.102>,
> Gene Ward Smith <ge...@chewbacca.org> wrote:
>>
>>The point is, until relatively recent times the prey population could not
>>support a breeding population of predators. And even today, it would get
>>noticed.
>
> Hmmm.
>
> Problem: Prey is rare.
>
> Solution: make vampires much smaller than their prey (Although
> not as small as mosquiotoes). Half as tall could mean one eighth the
> mass.
Why not about as small as mosquitoes, or perhaps hummingbirds?
Then, most of what they are is illusion, projected into the human
mind. We don't see them in mirrors, because they're not actually there.
Cameras don't capture them for the same reason.
Depending on how specific this projection is, one can explain the
antipathy of animals, or the sympathy of other animals.
If most of what we see is illusion, this also covers the shape-changing
ability. If you're small, you can pass through a gate under the guise
of mist without a problem.
--
Aaron Denney
-><-
John Schilling
wrote:
>d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote in
>news:slrnftvc9...@gatekeeper.vic.com:
When did that ever become the point? Vampires *are* scientific idiocy,
and I don't think anyone here has claimed otherwise. There's a small
subset of vampire stories that tries to fit them into a purely scientific
world view, but for the most part vampires are characters of fantasy, not
science fiction. Magic, and thus scientifically idiotic. Every bit as
scientifically idiotic as e.g. Nazgul, and just as fun to tell stories
about so long as you don't insist on missing the point.
In particular, it's silly to talk about vampires having evolved. In
vampire stories, "intelligent design" is fact, and the only sort of
science that can be counted on is "creation science".
Hey, they're marketed as "horror", so don't say you werent warned :-)
--
*John Schilling * "Anything worth doing, *
*Member:AIAA,NRA,ACLU,SAS,LP * is worth doing for money" *
*Chief Scientist & General Partner * -13th Rule of Acquisition *
*White Elephant Research, LLC * "There is no substitute *
*John.S...@alumni.usc.edu * for success" *
*661-718-0955 or 661-275-6795 * -58th Rule of Acquisition *
Wayne Throop
: When did that ever become the point?
Upthread of here.
Message-ID: <Xns9A6482474F771ge...@207.115.33.102>
>> Of course, the inherent idiocy of postulating a predator on humans is
>> not improved by making them weak.
> What's idiotic about a predator whose prey are humans?
The situation cannot arise as a result of evolution.
Plus there have been several recent threads about "vampires as hard science",
many of them sparked by "Blindsight" by Peter Watts.
: Vampires *are* scientific idiocy, and I don't think anyone here has
: claimed otherwise.
Well, again, some folks were objecting to the notion that an obligate
human predator doesn't make evolutionary sense. So, in that limited
sense, some folks "here" were "claiming otherwise" as in claiming that
they *did* make evolutionary sense. Possibly this is combined with
"makes evolutionary sense if augmented with magic", but if you've
introduced magic, why argue evolutionary sense?
Also, in previous threads, folks were arguing that the Watts book
was "hard SF" and that the "vampires" therein made scientific sense.
Although rife with references to scientific papers, I don't think
Watts book really makes a good case as "hard SF".
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Gene Ward Smith
> We don't see them in mirrors, because they're not actually there.
What about making them fictional creations? We don't actually see them,
because it's a movie. This helps explain how they evolved.
Gene Ward Smith
news:66j0u39pf087mcblc...@4ax.com:
>>"Magic" isn't a very useful response when the point is to show that
something
>>isn't scientific idiocy.
>
> When did that ever become the point?
Starting with Post #1 on this thread.
Aaron Denney
That's also much less interesting.
William December Starr
Gene Ward Smith <ge...@chewbacca.org> said:
> Par <use...@hunter-gatherer.org> wrote in
> news:slrnftvvrm.2do.usenet@hunter- gatherer.org:
>
>> It is a lousy idea because [so] far we have been able to beat the
>> crap out of just about every predator we have encountered. But
>> if we posit that a vampire is really, really good at it the name
>> of the game changes.
>
> He never gets a chance to be good at it because he doesn't evolve
> obligate predation on humans.
Is that "obligate" a mandatory part of the definition of "vampire?"
--
William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
Gene Ward Smith
@panix3.panix.com:
> Is that "obligate" a mandatory part of the definition of "vampire?"
Usually.
William December Starr
Gene Ward Smith <ge...@chewbacca.org> said:
>> Is that "obligate" a mandatory part of the definition of "vampire?"
>
> Usually.
That's too bad. "Gotta eat humans" _is_ a lot harder to explain than
a simple "They taste better than cows."
Robert Carnegie
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote in news:17567946-c740-40e4-
> 9291-60b45d007...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com:
>
> > (1) They're a sub-species of human.
>
> > (2) They're invisible. Or they hypnotise us. Or they pass as human.
> > Or they're incredibly sneaky.
>
> And this all evolved how?
Conceivably with deliberate intervention. Say there's been a cult
that drinks human blood for a /very/ long time, they become dependent
on it - just like actually we (I think all mammals?) have a gene to
produce vitamin C, but it's /broken/, so we need vitamin C in our
diet. This arose because we /had/ vitamin C in our diet.
Or somebody spends an awfully long time selectively breeding apes to
behave like vampires, and to pass for human at a distance. Or
something.
Now a big "problem" to reproduce vampires is to make the critters
dependent on humans specifically, but do we have to do that? Do
classical vampire stories have cattle mutilations as well? There's
that crazy guy who eats flies, isn't there? So I'm thinking, we do
have for real "vampire bats"... they just don't dig wolf calls, and
turn into mist, and all that.
David DeLaney
>Now a big "problem" to reproduce vampires is to make the critters
>dependent on humans specifically, but do we have to do that? Do
>classical vampire stories have cattle mutilations as well? There's
>that crazy guy who eats flies, isn't there? So I'm thinking, we do
>have for real "vampire bats"... they just don't dig wolf calls, and
>turn into mist, and all that.
Several different authors have had them able to live off cattle, horse blood,
small animals, etc.; some of them explain that the blood of 'lesser animals'
isn't as tasty, or as vivid, or doesn't pump them up as much, as human blood,
while others have it all be about the same.
Dave "blood pudding" DeLaney
Hallvard B Furuseth
Not on my newsserver. Does your Post #1 contain 'Subject: Re: ...' or
a References: header?
--
Hallvard
Mike Schilling
> On 18 Mar 2008 21:39:31 -0400, wds...@panix.com (William December
> Starr) wrote:
>
>> In article <Xns9A65BA4901E70ge...@207.115.17.102>,
>> Gene Ward Smith <ge...@chewbacca.org> said:
>>
>>>> Is that "obligate" a mandatory part of the definition of
>>>> "vampire?"
>>>
>>> Usually.
>>
>> That's too bad. "Gotta eat humans" _is_ a lot harder to explain
>> than
>> a simple "They taste better than cows."
>
> speak. In which case, there probably are at least a few heretics
> and
> apostates who prey on other species, at least until they get
> careless
> and stop expecting the Transylvanian Inquisition.
Preying on humans is probably biology, but drinling the blood only of
sexy (if currently virginal) young girls instead of boys is a
religious law. You know how fundamentalists feel about
hemosucksuality.
norrin
> Par <use...@hunter-gatherer.org> wrote innews:slrnftvvrm.2do.usenet@hunter-
Vampires didn't start out needing humans, they never needed
any primate until recently. What caused them to start, and
why are they more prolific? In part, it's human encroachment
on former wilderness. Mainly, it's because humans taste
goood.
The recent increase in human population has led to an
increased vampire population, but not in proportion. They
were always rare, now they're rarer (blue).
Jaimie Vandenbergh
*stares* Oh, bravo!
Cheers - Jaimie
--
"Wow! Virtual memory! Now I can have a REALLY big RAM disk!"
norrin
> When did that ever become the point? Vampires *are* scientific idiocy,
> and I don't think anyone here has claimed otherwise. There's a small
> subset of vampire stories that tries to fit them into a purely scientific
> world view, but for the most part vampires are characters of fantasy, not
> science fiction. Magic, and thus scientifically idiotic. Every bit as
> scientifically idiotic as e.g. Nazgul, and just as fun to tell stories
> about so long as you don't insist on missing the point.
The existence of vampires, like Atlantis, doesn't require magic.
> In particular, it's silly to talk about vampires having evolved. In
> vampire stories, "intelligent design" is fact, and the only sort of
> science that can be counted on is "creation science".
Be careful. Don't scoff at the precambrian intellegences.
Par
> Conceivably with deliberate intervention. Say there's been a cult
> that drinks human blood for a /very/ long time, they become dependent
> on it - just like actually we (I think all mammals?) have a gene to
> produce vitamin C, but it's /broken/, so we need vitamin C in our
> diet. This arose because we /had/ vitamin C in our diet.
Slight correction; it could arise because we had sufficient vitamin C in
"our" (it is the higher primates, IIRC) diet. Random mutation, not a
problem, linked to other usefull traits/founder effect/bottleneck
effect, and Bobs yer UNCLE.
/Par
--
Par use...@hunter-gatherer.org
Life is a test. Life is only a test. If this had been a real Life, you would
have been given instructions on where to go and what to do.
Life is complex. It has real and imaginary parts.
Gene Ward Smith
> Several different authors have had them able to live off cattle, horse
blood,
> small animals, etc.; some of them explain that the blood of 'lesser
animals'
> isn't as tasty, or as vivid, or doesn't pump them up as much, as human
blood,
> while others have it all be about the same.
>
True, but they aren't a predator on humans then. In fact, typically they
aren't into predation at all.
Gene Ward Smith
news:hbf.2008...@bombur.uio.no:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.written/msg/5dd80681e7a69016
or
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.arts.sf.written/msg/5dd80681e7a69016?
dmode=source
if you want all the headers.
Derek Lyons
>Conceivably with deliberate intervention. Say there's been a cult
>that drinks human blood for a /very/ long time, they become dependent
>on it - just like actually we (I think all mammals?) have a gene to
>produce vitamin C, but it's /broken/, so we need vitamin C in our
>diet. This arose because we /had/ vitamin C in our diet.
Either the have become dependent on it, or they believe they have so
become because their bodies are lying to them...
I saw some research that indicates what foods you can tolerate may
depend greatly on what foods you grew up with - the liver, as you grow
up, ceases to provide enzymes for foods you don't eat.
Mark Stephen
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>> Now a big "problem" to reproduce vampires is to make the critters
>> dependent on humans specifically, but do we have to do that? Do
>> classical vampire stories have cattle mutilations as well? There's
>> that crazy guy who eats flies, isn't there? So I'm thinking, we do
>> have for real "vampire bats"... they just don't dig wolf calls, and
>> turn into mist, and all that.
>
> Several different authors have had them able to live off cattle, horse blood,
> small animals, etc.; some of them explain that the blood of 'lesser animals'
> isn't as tasty, or as vivid, or doesn't pump them up as much, as human blood,
> while others have it all be about the same.
>
> Dave "blood pudding" DeLaney
Nobody's (I think) mentioned the Discworld vampires.They prefer human
blood, but can explicitly do without it, and the Black Ribboners do.
They are really immortal, like the Hammer Horror Dracula. They can be
reduced to dust, but sooner or later, some of that dust will come into
contact with blood - it may take millennia - and the vampire will
reconstitute, its personality intact.
Weak vampire: Otto Chiek, the Black Ribbon vampire flash photographer.
He can tolerate sunlight, but is invariably reduced to dust by his
camera flash. He carries a small vial of blood which, usually, breaks
when he disintegrates; failing that the sign he carries asks passers-by
to break the vial. His passion is for light rather than blood, and he is
possibly the least threatening vampire in fiction.
Robert Carnegie
This is of course taken fairly directly from real-world 'temperance"
organisations, in the old days, campaigning against alcohol use and
alcoholism. And the "Salvation Army" (are they big in temperance?),
which is a Christian church with a lot of quasi-military set
dressing. All the way down to the modest young girl who plays the
piano at meetings while they sing about never drinking blood, etc.,
and who winks at Otto (von)(Chriek)sometimes... which gratifies him
considerably.
Otto is non-threatening by choice and by self-control, and it's
possible for him to fall off the waggon, in which event people around
him are in great danger. But, having had this plotline explored one
or more times, he's appeared more recently as a cheerful minor
character with a naturally ghoulish sense of humour, given some of the
situations that he's called on to take photographs of - I forget if
the police use him for evidence.
If his dust is mixed with other dust, he tends to reincorporate (fully
re-clothed) with the characteristics of other materials, such as loose
carpet fibres.
Other Discworld vampires - well, one family discovered that their
conventional vulnerabilities were substantially psychological - e.g.
they expected to be repelled by religious symbols - and could be
overcome by will...
Robert Carnegie
> Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com>:
>
> > Conceivably with deliberate intervention. Say there's been a cult
> > that drinks human blood for a /very/ long time, they become dependent
> > on it - just like actually we (I think all mammals?) have a gene to
> > produce vitamin C, but it's /broken/, so we need vitamin C in our
> > diet. This arose because we /had/ vitamin C in our diet.
>
> Slight correction; it could arise because we had sufficient vitamin C in
> "our" (it is the higher primates, IIRC) diet. Random mutation, not a
> problem, linked to other usefull traits/founder effect/bottleneck
> effect, and Bobs yer UNCLE.
Yes... but I think with sufficient time, losing a gene that isn't
"beneficial" is /inevitable/. As I understand, we have a
"pseudogene", wrecked to the point of not doing anything, but
recognisable as a version of the gene that other critters have, that
makes vitamin C.
I suppose the next thing to do is to look for fish living their entire
lives in dark caves that so far /haven't/ lost their eyes (or had
eyelids grown shut, etc.)
Alexey Romanov
> Par <use...@hunter-gatherer.org> wrote in news:slrnftvvrm.2do.usenet@hunter-
> gatherer.org:
>
>> It is a lousy idea because som far we have been able to beat the crap
>> out of just about every predator we have encountered. But if we posit
>> that a vampire is really, really good at it the name of the game
>> changes.
In particular, other predators do not usually have even human-level
intelligence. This doesn't have apply to vampires.
> He never gets a chance to be good at it because he doesn't evolve obligate
> predation on humans.
He evolves obligatory predation on hominids during the Out Of Africa phase.
Other, stupider hominids are his preferred prey, but there's a bit of a
shortage nowadays...
--
Alexey Romanov
Alexey Romanov
> In article <17567946-c740-40e4...@s13g2000prd.googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>
>>See also Harry Potter - why powerful wizards and witches would
>>successfully hide all magical entities from ordinary humans, instead
>>of just taking over the world - and then how they would successfully
>>keep their secrets - it only makes sense if the magic is very powerful
>>indeed but the administrative skills of the magicians are lamentably
>>poor
>
> This is not ruled out by the text.
>
> It's also clear that magical ability has nothing to do with
> being bright, although being bright can be an asset for using what
> magical ability one has.
It seems pretty clear they are, in fact, negatively correlated.
--
Alexey Romanov
Gene Ward Smith
$.1xasmu3y...@40tude.net:
>> He never gets a chance to be good at it because he doesn't evolve obligate
>> predation on humans.
>
> He evolves obligatory predation on hominids during the Out Of Africa phase.
> Other, stupider hominids are his preferred prey, but there's a bit of a
> shortage nowadays...
>
Pretty good, but why when archaic h. sap. leaves Africa does a species branch
off predating h. erectus, given that there are more common and easier prey?
As for the bloodsucking, I suggest you forget about it as it makes these
specious explanations that much harder.
Robert Carnegie
I'm not sure why this fantasy is bugging you so much. I'd like to be
sure this isn't really deeply distressing you for some reason before I
go, "Maybe he has something to hide..." - but, whoops... ;-)
Gene Ward Smith
870f-61f...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
> I'm not sure why this fantasy is bugging you so much.
It seems to be bugging other people, not me. I said it was scientific idiocy,
and Mike asked why. It turned into an argument when people kept trying to
make sense of it.
Kay Shapero
@b64g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>, rja.ca...@excite.com says...
>
> Other Discworld vampires - well, one family discovered that their
> conventional vulnerabilities were substantially psychological - e.g.
> they expected to be repelled by religious symbols - and could be
> overcome by will...
>
While another discovered that it was possible to rise from the dead, but
not from the cat.... (That whole sequence in Witches Abroad is one of
the funniest vampire scenes I have ever encountered in literature...)
--
Kay Shapero
http://www.kayshapero.net
Address munged - to email use kay at the domain of my website, above.
DouhetSukd
> Because they are good at it? Have we looked for them? Sure, we wouild
> have noticed if tens of freshlyn drained corpses turned up in London
> each night, but what if 5% of the brain cancer incidence is explained by
> vampires draining the <mumble> from the victims mind?
>
Prayer to Broken Stones by Dan Simmons. Short story: "Metastatis".
Takes exactly that hypothesis, hero has a had a knock on the head of
some sort, resulting in vision at UV wavelengths and sees gremlin-like
creatures (or maybe worms, can't remember) that cause/feed from
cancers. Creepy story.
Prayer to Broken Stones has a number of stories which formed the
nuclei of Simmon's successful early novels. I guess by the time he
got to write Endymion he was down to recycling his ideas.
Also his vampires in Carrion Comfort feed on human suffering during
murders and would be near-undetectable unless one of them decided to
become buddies with the cattle and share the story.
DouhetSukd
>
> 1: The smilodon solution. Sabre teeth let cats take down surprisingly
> large prey, which is why it keeps re-evolving (But being dependent on large
> prey, by definition more prone to population collapses than small, is why
> sabre toothed cats keep dying out).
>
Actually, there was recent study that claimed that computer modelling
of sabre tooth tigers showed that they weren't so good at obtaining
jaw pressure from their cranial structure. Apparently a modern tiger
or lion has a more efficient skull for leveraging muscle tension into
kg/cm2 or pounds/square inch at the jaw's point of contact.
p.s. Yes, I know I should say newton/cm2, but who the heck cares about
newtons anyway.
David T. Bilek
<Douhe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Mar 17, 10:46 pm, Par <use...@hunter-gatherer.org> wrote:
>
>> Because they are good at it? Have we looked for them? Sure, we wouild
>> have noticed if tens of freshlyn drained corpses turned up in London
>> each night, but what if 5% of the brain cancer incidence is explained by
>> vampires draining the <mumble> from the victims mind?
>>
>
>Prayer to Broken Stones by Dan Simmons. Short story: "Metastatis".
>Takes exactly that hypothesis, hero has a had a knock on the head of
>some sort, resulting in vision at UV wavelengths and sees gremlin-like
>creatures (or maybe worms, can't remember) that cause/feed from
>cancers. Creepy story.
They're much closer to worms. Big white maggoty type worms.
-David
Robert Carnegie
We are SF readers. Making excuses for writers' elementary science
mistakes is an ever-necessary skill :-)
Michael Grosberg
> John Schilling <schil...@spock.usc.edu> wrote innews:66j0u39pf087mcblc...@4ax.com:
>
>
>
> >>"Magic" isn't a very useful response when the point is to show that
> something
> >>isn't scientific idiocy.
>
> > When did that ever become the point?
>
> Starting with Post #1 on this thread.
Ummm, being the writer of post #1 I have to say I don't see that. The
point was to see how far a writer can stray from the vampire myth and
still call an invented creature a vampire. Weak vampires can be cursed
fantastic creatures - in fact, it makes much more sense that a curse
would make you physically weaker than give you powers.
Gene Ward Smith
409d-ab72-4...@d45g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
>> Starting with Post #1 on this thread.
>
> Ummm, being the writer of post #1 I have to say I don't see that.
I don't count your posting as the beginning of this specific thread.
William December Starr
DouhetSukd <Douhe...@gmail.com> said:
> Also [Dan Simmons'] vampires in Carrion Comfort feed on human
> suffering during murders and would be near-undetectable unless one
> of them decided to become buddies with the cattle and share the
> story.
I don't think I'd agree that they "feed" at all, except in the way
hat a bully feeds on the suffering of his victims. My feeling was
that they do what they do because (a) it's fun and (b) they can, not
because they derive nourishment from it.
--
William December Starr <wds...@panix.com>
DouhetSukd
> I don't think I'd agree that they "feed" at all, except in the way
> hat a bully feeds on the suffering of his victims. My feeling was
> that they do what they do because (a) it's fun and (b) they can, not
> because they derive nourishment from it.
>
's been a long while, so I don't recall exactly, but I seem to
remember that the "vampires" in Carrion Comfort were unnaturally young
for their physical age. I'll stick with 'feed' myself - I agree with
you that it wasn't the typical Dracula-needs-his-evening-tipple kinda
feeding. But it went beyond "because they can", though I can't
remember the specifics 15 yrs later.
Christopher Adams
>
> This is of course taken fairly directly from real-world 'temperance"
> organisations, in the old days, campaigning against alcohol use and
> alcoholism. And the "Salvation Army" (are they big in temperance?)
Yeah. Not least, apparently, because in the course of charity work they
quite often spend time around alcoholics. A friend of mine was raised by
Salvo parents, though they're more mainstream Christians now, and they
wouldn't drink even at home.
--
Christopher Adams
Sydney, Australia
I'm waiting for the rain to come
I'm waiting for the light to go
My hands are shaking
My eyes are dry
I'm waiting for the clouds to cover up the sky
Robert Carnegie
<mhacdeinvalidbhan...@yahoo.invalid> wrote:
> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
> > This is of course taken fairly directly from real-world 'temperance"
> > organisations, in the old days, campaigning against alcohol use and
> > alcoholism. And the "Salvation Army" (are they big in temperance?)
>
> Yeah. Not least, apparently, because in the course of charity work they
> quite often spend time around alcoholics. A friend of mine was raised by
> Salvo parents, though they're more mainstream Christians now, and they
> wouldn't drink even at home.
And now I realise I've forgotten or I never found out how they manage
the universal Christian simulated cannibalism ritual, in that case -
since wine apparently is specified. Well, probably not important.
Gene Ward Smith
8ff8-1d4...@c65g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:
> And now I realise I've forgotten or I never found out how they manage
> the universal Christian simulated cannibalism ritual,
Welch's 100% Concord grape juice.
Chuk Goodin
Nicoll) wrote:
> Come to think of it, one of the interesting things going on in
>India as the nation urbanizes is that monkeys are moving into the cities
>as well. Right now urban monkey populations are soaring but if the Indians
>manage to deal with that [1], predators might consider switching from
>monkeys to the next best thing available in huge numbers.
>
>
>1: I would like to say at this point that the plan where annoying monkey
>tribes are driven out by the deliberate introduction of larger, more
>aggressive monkeys is a bad, bad idea.
Wouldn't we count as larger more aggressive monkeys? Or apes, anyway.
--
chuk
Christopher Adams
> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>
>> And now I realise I've forgotten or I never found out how they manage
>> the universal Christian simulated cannibalism ritual,
>
> Welch's 100% Concord grape juice.
Yes, as some other churches do for children taking communion.
I forget the term for it, but when I accompanied a friend to Reform Jewish
services (I had both a home close to the synagogue and a car, when she had
neither) during a time when she was interested in converting, they had a
sort of social stand-around-with-wine-and-bread thing after the formal
service.
Funnily enough, though my family background is nominally Church of England
Christian, the only Christian service I ever attended was my grandfather's
funeral, and I attended a dozen Jewish services because of that friend.
Mike Schilling
> Gene Ward Smith wrote:
>> Robert Carnegie wrote:
>>
>>> And now I realise I've forgotten or I never found out how they
>>> manage the universal Christian simulated cannibalism ritual,
>>
>> Welch's 100% Concord grape juice.
>
> Yes, as some other churches do for children taking communion.
>
> I forget the term for it, but when I accompanied a friend to Reform
> Jewish services (I had both a home close to the synagogue and a car,
> when she had neither) during a time when she was interested in
> converting, they had a sort of social
> stand-around-with-wine-and-bread thing after the formal service.
Oneg Shabbat. Just bread, though, no sweets? How do they persuade
children to attend services?
William December Starr
jdni...@panix.com (James Nicoll) said:
> Come to think of it, one of the interesting things going on in
> India as the nation urbanizes is that monkeys are moving into the
> cities as well. Right now urban monkey populations are soaring
Indeed:
"Monkeys recently broke into the Defense Department, scattering secret
documents." -- Ian Williams, NBC News, in Delhi, India, 19 Dec. 2007
Sean O'Hara
December Starr declared:
It's far worse than that -- they've moved onto political assassination:
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7055625.stm>
The deputy mayor of the Indian capital Delhi has died a day
after being attacked by a horde of wild monkeys.
SS Bajwa suffered serious head injuries when he fell from the
first-floor terrace of his home on Saturday morning trying to
fight off the monkeys.
The city has long struggled to counter its plague of monkeys,
which invade government complexes and temples, snatch food
and scare passers-by.
The High Court ordered the city to find an answer to the
problem last year.
One approach has been to train bands of larger, more ferocious
langur monkeys to go after the smaller groups of Rhesus macaques.
So it begins. Next they'll league together and decide "Ape shall not
kill ape."
--
Sean O'Hara <http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
It never should have been Edgar. It should have been Kim.
--Stephen King
Beowulf Bolt
>
> One approach has been to train bands of larger, more ferocious
> langur monkeys to go after the smaller groups of Rhesus macaques.
>
> So it begins. Next they'll league together and decide "Ape shall not
> kill ape."
"Upright posture bad. Knuckle-dragging good."
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"All around me darkness gathers, fading is the sun that shone,
we must speak of other matters, you can be me when I'm gone..."
- SANDMAN #67, Neil Gaiman
-------------------------------------------------------------------
William George Ferguson
wrote:
>Sean O'Hara wrote:
>>
>> One approach has been to train bands of larger, more ferocious
>> langur monkeys to go after the smaller groups of Rhesus macaques.
>>
>> So it begins. Next they'll league together and decide "Ape shall not
>> kill ape."
>
> "Upright posture bad. Knuckle-dragging good."
Of course, that leaves only a small step to "Knuckle-dragging good, upright
posture better".
--
I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain.
(Bene Gesserit)
ravenlynne
I know I'm wrong for laughing at this....but who wants this sort of
thing in their eulogy?
--
Leah: That were a wee bit repulsive.
Buffy: Went okay. 'Cept I feel a little wierd about using a
crucifix to kill someone.
Leah: Yeh dinno much about religion, do yeh?
Sean O'Hara
declared:
>>
> I know I'm wrong for laughing at this....but who wants this sort of
> thing in their eulogy?
>
Hey, it'd make a great pulp story. Or maybe an episode of Hardcastle
and McCormack. "Monkey See -- Monkey KILL!"
--
Sean O'Hara <http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com>
Robot Elder #1: Elders, execute function control-shift-kill.
-Futurama
Robert Carnegie
Charlton Heston?
I mean, it's either gonna be "Get your hands off me you damn dirty
apes", or "You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead
fingers."
Come to think, I suppose /both/ could be unfitting to the ceremony.
Like a cremation where the deceased's favourite love song is played
and it's "Smoke Gets In Your Eyes".
Which reminds me on the usual reeling tangent of the bride who may or
may not have requested Bryan Adams' romantic song from _Robin Hood:
Prince Of Thieves_ as she entered the church, but got instead:
Robin Hood, Robin Hood,
Riding through the glen,
Robin Hood, Robin Hood,
With his band of men,
Feared by the bad, loved by the good,
Robin Hood! Robin Hood! Robin Hood!
He called the greatest archers
To a tavern on the green,
They vowed to help the people of the king,
They handled all the trouble
On the English country scene,
And still found plenty of time to sing.
Robin Hood, Robin Hood,
Riding through the glen,
Robin Hood, Robin Hood,
With his band of men,
Feared by the bad, loved by the good,
Robin Hood! Robin Hood! Robin Hood!
Gene Ward Smith
b7c5-000...@u10g2000prn.googlegroups.com:
> I mean, it's either gonna be "Get your hands off me you damn dirty
> apes", or "You can have my gun when you pry it from my cold, dead
> fingers."
>
There's always "Behold his mighty hand!"
ravenlynne
> In the Year of the Earth Rat, the Great and Powerful ravenlynne declared:
>>>
>> I know I'm wrong for laughing at this....but who wants this sort of
>> thing in their eulogy?
>>
>
> Hey, it'd make a great pulp story. Or maybe an episode of Hardcastle and
> McCormack. "Monkey See -- Monkey KILL!"
>
Or a whole series of comics.
Christopher Adams
> Christopher Adams wrote:
>
>> I forget the term for it, but when I accompanied a friend to Reform
>> Jewish services (I had both a home close to the synagogue and a car,
>> when she had neither) during a time when she was interested in
>> converting, they had a sort of social
>> stand-around-with-wine-and-bread thing after the formal service.
>
> Oneg Shabbat. Just bread, though, no sweets? How do they persuade
> children to attend services?
Oh, I very vaguely recall that there might have been sweet pastries. I don't
tend to pay attention to that sort of thing, because I dislike them.