Things you always wanted to know the answer to [Vol. 4]
Discussion
Clockwork Cupcake said:
Go on, tell us that black people have a natural sense of rhythm.
most unwise, all humans are the same, race is a cultural invention, there is no real reason why I can't groove and dance like James Brown and no reason that James Brown be equally proficient at fluid mechanics. MartG said:
popeyewhite said:
I also believe to a degree that someone with a modicum of talent and a great deal of enthuisiasm can become expert with a lot of practice... .
It has been said that Nigel Mansell wasn't hugely talented, but made up for it in enthusiasm and sheer perseveranceYou can't enthusiastically persevere an F1 car to a World Championship. Otherwise Matt Baker would be in with a shot.
SpeckledJim said:
MartG said:
popeyewhite said:
I also believe to a degree that someone with a modicum of talent and a great deal of enthuisiasm can become expert with a lot of practice... .
It has been said that Nigel Mansell wasn't hugely talented, but made up for it in enthusiasm and sheer perseveranceYou can't enthusiastically persevere an F1 car to a World Championship. Otherwise Matt Baker would be in with a shot.
I have a nephew who is an absolutely phenomenal guitarist . He's just not interested in joining a band,he's too shy, so he's never going to be known as the greatest guitar player in the world even if he is that good. I'm not saying he is but no-one will ever know.
I saw a show once, I can't remember the name of it now, but it featured a guitarist who was absolutely brilliant but his guitars had more stage presence than him so he was never going to be the world's best either.
You have to have talent, luck and presence to make it. Talent on its own won't do it.
I saw a show once, I can't remember the name of it now, but it featured a guitarist who was absolutely brilliant but his guitars had more stage presence than him so he was never going to be the world's best either.
You have to have talent, luck and presence to make it. Talent on its own won't do it.
Johnspex said:
I have a nephew who is an absolutely phenomenal guitarist .
Funnily enough one of the most popular theories of practice (ie an idividual can become expert with certain conditions of practice satisfied), the Theory of Deliberate Practice, was based on the performance improvements of a piano player IIRC (and chess!). Also the Sport Commitment Model is useful on nature/nurture.Not sure Hendrix or Vai had much coaching, certainly have presence though.
popeyewhite said:
Natural talent is neither here nor there? OKWell the nature vs nurture debate has raged for many years in academic circles, coaching academies etc, but someone on a car forum has settled the matter.
Moving on... .
Apparently it has been decided it is 80% nature and 20% nurture even in swimming which is 100% learnt...
I see the 'nature vs nurture debate' as a misunderstanding of the situation. I have always been a nature *and* nurture advocate, because one without the other doesn't get you very far.
If you seriously want to believe that Phelps would have been 80% of the swimmer he was at 15 if he had never immersed himself in water up to that point then that is your prerogative of course.
classicaholic said:
98elise said:
Is there a wealth of undiscovered talent in the general population?
By that I mean is it likely that there are loads of people walking around with no idea they in the right circumstances that would have been a world class golfer, driver, actor, academic, scientist etc? It's just that they never picked up that club, or took that subject etc?
Alternatively would you need a natural interest in a particular area to be come the best?
For something like football I would imagine that natural talent would be found as most people kick a ball around at some stage, but something like golf is not something the majority of people have a go at.
During war time the army and airforce found a lot of undiscovered talent for pilots and soldiers etc, I know of a lot of pilots that never knew about flying and were conscripted and became excellent pilots but never flew again after discharge.By that I mean is it likely that there are loads of people walking around with no idea they in the right circumstances that would have been a world class golfer, driver, actor, academic, scientist etc? It's just that they never picked up that club, or took that subject etc?
Alternatively would you need a natural interest in a particular area to be come the best?
For something like football I would imagine that natural talent would be found as most people kick a ball around at some stage, but something like golf is not something the majority of people have a go at.
As has been said above, being a racing driver is similar. It's an expensive hobby so not many with the potential are ever going to see a track, and then progress to F1.
98elise said:
That's exactly the sort of thing I mean. Flying is not something many people have exposure to, so there must be 1000's of people who would have made great pilots, yet have no idea.
that whizzes me back to the days of the krypton factor with gordon burns, [ where he ? ] they had a section on landing a passenger airliner via a simulator, and the contestants, especially the women [ or men who identified as women ] were almost exclusively hopeless at the task. john2443 said:
Big-Bo-Beep said:
gordon burns, [ where he ? ]
Wiki says he's 77, has moved back to Belfast, where he was born, and is second cousin of Ed Sheeran.https://www.quora.com/Is-the-assertion-that-you-ar...
The Mad Monk said:
john2443 said:
Big-Bo-Beep said:
gordon burns, [ where he ? ]
Wiki says he's 77, has moved back to Belfast, where he was born, and is second cousin of Ed Sheeran.https://www.quora.com/Is-the-assertion-that-you-ar...
How closely do you have to be related to someone in order to reasonably expect to have more in common with them than with the general population?
People often resemble their grandparents, even great grandparents and great uncles pretty closely. But how much further can similarities go?
98elise said:
classicaholic said:
98elise said:
Is there a wealth of undiscovered talent in the general population?
By that I mean is it likely that there are loads of people walking around with no idea they in the right circumstances that would have been a world class golfer, driver, actor, academic, scientist etc? It's just that they never picked up that club, or took that subject etc?
Alternatively would you need a natural interest in a particular area to be come the best?
For something like football I would imagine that natural talent would be found as most people kick a ball around at some stage, but something like golf is not something the majority of people have a go at.
During war time the army and airforce found a lot of undiscovered talent for pilots and soldiers etc, I know of a lot of pilots that never knew about flying and were conscripted and became excellent pilots but never flew again after discharge.By that I mean is it likely that there are loads of people walking around with no idea they in the right circumstances that would have been a world class golfer, driver, actor, academic, scientist etc? It's just that they never picked up that club, or took that subject etc?
Alternatively would you need a natural interest in a particular area to be come the best?
For something like football I would imagine that natural talent would be found as most people kick a ball around at some stage, but something like golf is not something the majority of people have a go at.
As has been said above, being a racing driver is similar. It's an expensive hobby so not many with the potential are ever going to see a track, and then progress to F1.
V8mate said:
The Moose said:
The chocolate ones have been smaller than the plain ones for yonks. At least ten years.popeyewhite said:
V8mate said:
Really? Loved these as a kid. They seemed the size of dinner plates. We used to call them 'big blacks'. Ha! Can't say that anymore! Have to call them small blacks now.Why do viruses make you ill? If a virus left you healthy enough to go to work and socialise as normal, it would spread faster. In fact, a virus that made you feel better than usual, so you would get up early and go to the Gym for 2 hours before work, then after work hit the bars until dawn, would spread all over the world.
Dr Jekyll said:
Why do viruses make you ill? If a virus left you healthy enough to go to work and socialise as normal, it would spread faster. In fact, a virus that made you feel better than usual, so you would get up early and go to the Gym for 2 hours before work, then after work hit the bars until dawn, would spread all over the world.
All a virus is is a small piece of RNA that injects into cells, hijacking the cells processes to make more viruses. Eventually the cell falls apart and the newly manufactured virus is released en mass as the cell dies. As a result it can't really make you healthy or give you awesome skin.Lots of viruses don't really make you ill and do spread far and wide. If you've ever had a coldsore, that was a Herpes virus, but wouldn't take you out of work unless you were a midwife or suchlike.
Likewise HPV, etc. We're riddled by viruses and covered in bacteria, but they often only cause us problems in certain areas or when our immune system either gets caught out and cells start dying or totally over reacts.
There's a really cool (if it's your thing) BBC documentary showing a cell vs virus interaction, the timeline and the chemical mechanisms that have evolved over millions of years to outdo each other. I find it really hard not to view as a battle of good vs evil, but of course they're both completely without motive. Brilliant:
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6agslv
Edited by glazbagun on Saturday 22 February 23:46
Gassing Station | The Lounge | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff