Chinua Achebe Was Right

You must forgive me for not posting in the last couple days. I was making this. I still am as a matter of fact.

B

You and I sat together, your arms around me tight,

A                                        B

And the trees were barely visible in the evening light.

B

I was thinking I could trust you, that you would play it cool,

A                                   B

but watch out for the yeomen in the vestibule

F#

You shouldn’t pretend somethin’s a joke

F# A  B     F#

if it ain’t funny.

And the trees were barely visible in the evening light
Watch out for the yeomen in the vestibule
You shouldn't pretend something is a joke
if it's not funny.

women are like diamonds.

they're pretty,

but they end up 

getting people killed.

imagine vast rhizome limb markets. only previous customers can handle the merchandise. first-timers are easily strong-armed.

P.S. You stole my joke about double entendres.

entendre * x^(n-1)

And the rhizomes,
reaching,
rent his limbs.
While he waited for
the skies to split
asunder.

------------

alright, now that we've had some days pass, i wanna get to the heart of this one. ambiguity 1: are the rhizomes paying a fee for the temporary use of his arms, or are they ripping the man apart. ambiguity 2 (less certain, tho I'll admit less than perfect certainty for 1 as well): are the skies a cue for his splitting, or does he sit in anticipation of theirs? tell me how close.

Two resources for psychohistoric inquiry. 

(1) this, especially the figures.

(2) the events listed here (0-1700) sketched out:

[Biases: Historical memory; European and Christian only]

what luck, the demons in the blog demanded a double entendre. or are we up to 4?

entendre?

i can't see the black keys

b/c i am playing the guitar.

i don't have enough money

for a ticket

or a piano.

entendre?

i can't see the black keys

b/c i am playing the guitar.

i don't have enough money

for a ticket

or a piano.

Kaplow!

And thus begins the great epic.

I propose a study of the way doomsdayism affects (or does not) the rise and fall of civilizations. Because, in my estimation, as long as the world has existed, there have been people predicting that it soon will not.

I'm not so much proposing a study of the eschatological theories themselves (though maybe that's necessary to truly get to the heart of the matter), but instead how the cyclic rise and fall of these theories coincides with that of populations around the world. I'm envisioning a time series chart like the following:

Though our chart will superimpose some sort of population/civilization measure. Is population enough? Moreover, how is eschatological prevalance measured? Is it something arbitrary like the 'Doomsday Clock?' Most likely, we will have to rely on imperfect census measures - extrapolating from them what we will, being careful to avoid the errs of wanton application of causal theory (as the Flying Spaghetti Monster so artfully demonstrated):

And what of the coarseness of our data set? Regionality will certainly come into play, but then, collapse of one region could have ripple effects that in turn bring down others. In that event, the prominence of a doomsday theory may well extend beyond its reach. The world may then end for those who didn't even know it was supposed to.

It seems like a relevant study with such topics being all the rage these days - what with economic meltdowns, various climate crises, and the ever-present threat of technological singularity.(1)

Kardashev scale projections ranging from 1900 to 2100