Archive for February, 2008

Heinrich Heine

Weise erdenken die neuen Gedanken, und Narren verbreiten sie.
Wise people discover the new thoughts, and fools spread them.
Aus: http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~wiskott/
DeutscheAphorismen/authorQuotes/Heine_Heinrich.html

Heinrich Heine: zwei Zitate aus Wikiquote

Es gibt zwei Sorten Ratten: // Die hungrigen und satten.
(Untranslatable)
Zeitgedichte, gutenberg.spiegel.de

Müde Beine, viele Steine, Aussicht keine, Heinrich Heine.
(Untranslatable)
Eintrag von Heine in das Gipfelbuch des Brockens nach dem Aufstieg an einem nebligen Tag, 1824

Nietzsche

Wer von Grund auf Lehrer ist, nimmt alle Dinge nur in bezug auf seine Schüler ernst, – sogar sich selbst.
He who from his deepest conviction is a teacher, takes only those things seriously which are related to his students, even himself.
Aus: http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~wiskott/DeutscheAphorismen/authorQuotes/Nietzsche_Friedrich.html

Du gehst zu Frauen? Vergiss die Peitsche nicht!
You visit women? Don’t forget the whip.

Das Bild illustriert beide Nietzsche-Zitate (The picture illustrates both Nietzsche quotes)

copyright Klaus Rohde: Satire, Politik und Kunst

http://www.lulu.com/content/378808

Franz Liszt

Glücklich, wer mit den Verhältnissen zu brechen versteht, ehe sie ihn gebrochen haben!
Fortunate is who knows how to break with the circumstances before they have broken him!
Aus: http://itb.biologie.hu-berlin.de/~wiskott/DeutscheAphorismen/authorQuotes/Liszt_Franz.html

Wilhelm Busch

Kein altes Übel ist so gross, dass es nicht von einem neuen übertroffen werden könnte.
No old evil is so big that it cannot be surpassed by a new one.
Aus: Projekt Gutenberg, Der Spiegel
http://gutenberg.spiegel.de/

All translations by me

The most recent review of Marine Parasitology, edited by me, will be published in Integrative and Comparative Biology (formerly American Zoologist), and is currently available at

“Integrative and Comparative Biology Advance Access published February 11, 2008″

See an extract of the review below:

This book is the

“first to address so widely the broad field of marine parasitology.”

and it

“is an invaluable resource for teachers, as well as a reference for the professional
scientist, marine parasitologist or not. For example, it is also a great reference for ecologists and aquaculturists. Marine Parasitology was much needed, and perfectly reaches its goal.”

The review is by the French biologist Yves Desdevises, whose main interests are in:
evolution and coevolution in living systems: picoalgae and viruses, fish and parasites; phylogeny; molecular biology; evolutionary ecology and comparative analysis; biostatistics and numerical ecology. Dr. Desdevises works at UPMC Univ Paris 06, CNRS, UMR7628, Modèles en biologie cellulaire et évolutive, Laboratoire Arago, Banyuls-sur-Mer, France.

For the earlier 5 reviews see:

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/09/25/marine-parasitology-book-review/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/09/02/marine-parasitology-latest-book-review/

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2007/01/31/klaus-rohde-editor-marine-parasitology/

In einem Interview mit dem Spiegel (29.10.07), das unter dem Titel “Das ist Grossmannssucht” veröffentlicht wurde, äusserte sich der ehemalige Bundeskanzler über einige aktuelle politische Fragen. Auszüge sind hier zu finden.

Zusätzlich zu diesen Auszügen:

In Bezug auf Iran, und ob weitere Sanktionen wegen seines Atomprogrammes gerechtfertigt seien:

Schmidt: “Oekonomische Sanktionen sollen dazu führen, dass das gesteigerte Elend der kleinen Leute deren Regierung zum Umdenken bringt – für mich ist das kein guter Weg.

Spiegel: US-Präsident George W. Bush spricht indessen sogar von einem möglichen dritten Weltkrieg. Teilen Sie diese dramatische Einschätzung?

Schmidt: Ich halte sie erstens für unzutreffend und zweitens für überflüssig, weil drittens für gefährlich. Sie impliziert eine Drohung, die sich gegen den Iran zu richten scheint.

………

Schmidt:……Es (die deutsche Regierung) sollte ein Interesse daran haben, dass auch alle übrigen Partner ihren Teil der Verpflichtungen einhalten, denn das tun sie ja nicht: Statt vertragsgemäss ihre Atomwaffen abzurüsten, entwickeln sie neue Waffen, modernisieren ihre Arsenale, ihre Trägersysteme, Raketen, Flugzeuge und U-Boote…..”

Schmidt (als Antwort einer Frage über den deutsche Einsatz in Afghanistan): ” Der Grund für die Intervention war ausschliesllich al-Quaida; und inzwischen is al-Quaida nach Pakistan abgezogen. Sollen wir demnächst auch dort einmarschieren?”

Schmidt (in Bezug auf Kanzler Merkels “Ratschläge” an Putin und die chinesische Regierung Tibet betreffend)…”was die inneren Angelegenheiten anderer Staaten betrifft, so hat unsere Regierung weder den Russen noch den Amerikanern und schon gar nicht den Chinesen öffentliche Ratschläge zu geben”.

Weiteres dazu in meinen Posts unter Iran/Iraq und in meinem Post

http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/2008/02/09/the-worlds-future-at-stake-the-us-elections/

Uebersetzungen von mir. Translations by me.

An all unserem Ärger sind andere schuld. Das beste Mittel aber, um bei guter Laune zu bleiben, ist die stets richtige Erkenntnis, dass man selber nichts taugt.
All our troubles are due to others. But the best way to stay in good spirits is to have the always correct insight that oneself is not worth anything.
(Wilhelm Busch, from Projekt Gutenberg, Der Spiegel)

Sokrates sagte beim Anblick zum Verkauf ausgelegter Luxusartikel: Wie vieles gibt es doch, was ich nicht nötig habe.
Sokrates in front of articles of luxury spread out for sale: How many things there are which I don’t need.
(Schopenhauer, Aphorismen)

Jede Nation spottet über die andere, und alle haben recht.
Each nation ridicules the other, and all are right.
(Schopenhauer, Aphorismen)

Der Rang….ist…..eine Komödie für den grossen Haufen.
One’s status (rank)….is……. a comedy for the masses.
(Schopenhauer, Aphorismen)

Ueber den Krieg: Wenige wollen ihn, viele doch fürchten ihn, aber sie alle kommen hinein.
About war: few want it, many fear it, but they all get into it.
(Bertolt Brecht, Vorschläge für den Frieden Gesammelte Werke 20, Schriften zur Politik und Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt/Main 1967)

Wenn man wissen will, was der Frühling ist, muss man an den Winter denken.
If you want to know what spring is, you must think of winter.
(Ein chinesischer Philosoph nach Bertolt Brecht, Vorschläge für den Frieden, Gesammelte Werke 20, Schriften zur Politik und Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt/Main 1967)

Ohne Braut gibt’s keine Heirat.
Without a bride there is no wedding.
(Alter Bauernspruch nach Bertolt Brecht, Vorschläge für den Frieden Gesammelte Werke 20, Schriften zur Politik und Gesellschaft. Suhrkamp Verlag, Frankfurt/Main 1967)

Tropical habitats have a much greater species diversity than high-latitude habitats. Does this imply that tropical species have smaller niches, as claimed by the latitude-niche breadth hypothesis? A recent paper, of which the pdf is now freely available on the web, deals with this problem. For the pdf of the full text click here.

See the Abstract below.

VIE ET MILIEU – LIFE AND ENVIRONMENT, 2007, 57 (3) : 181-187
Habitat width along a latitudinal gradient.

D. STAUFFER1, C. SCHULZE1, K. ROHDE2*
1 Theoretische Physik, Universität, D-50923 Köln, Euroland
2 Zoology, University of New England, Armidale NSW 2351, Australia
*Corresponding author: krohde@une.edu.au

ABSTRACT. – We use the Chowdhury ecosystem model, one of the most complex agent-based ecological models, to test the latitude-niche breadth hypothesis, with regard to habitat width, i.e., whether tropical species generally have narrower habitats than high latitude ones. In two previous studies using the Chowdhury Model, we have shown that simulations result in faster speciation in the tropics and in latitudinal diversity gradients, that the complexity of foodwebs increases with time and at higher rates in the tropics (Rohde & Stauffer 2005), and that latitudinal ranges of species are greater in the tropics, contradicting Rapoport’s rule (Stauffer & Rohde 2006). In this paper we show that the Chowdhury Model does not support the latitude-niche breadth hypothesis for the niche dimension habitat width: habitats, measured by comparing species numbers in small and large areas at a particular locality, are generally wider and not narrower in the tropics. This hypothesis cannot, therefore, give a causal explanation of latitudinal gradients in species diversity.

CHOWDHURY ECOSYSTEM MODEL
LATITUDE-NICHE BREADTH HYPOTHESIS
RAPOPORT’S RULE
LATITUDINAL GRADIENTS
SPECIES DIVERSITY
VAGILITY

For previous posts on latitudinal gradients click here and here.

Sydney Morning Herald 8.2.08. Extracts from:

“America’s choice, our future“(full article here).

“But surely the disastrous misadventure in Iraq will deter future American commanders-in-chief from launching any new wars? Not at all. There are three points here.

First, America is a country that is comfortable with war. In the 230 years since the Declaration of Independence, the US has invaded other countries on more than 200 occasions, according to the Congressional Research Service. That is an average of one foreign incursion every 14 months in the nation’s history.
Second, the end of the Cold War was supposed to mean a standing-down of the US military machine. The opposite has happened. The Pentagon’s budget today, after adjusting for inflation, exceeds its Cold War average by one-eighth, though there is no longer any nation that could be called a peer competitor.
“The truth is that there no longer exists any meaningful context within which Americans might consider the question, ‘How much is enough?’ ” writes Professor Andrew Bacevich, a historian at Boston University and former US Army colonel in his book The New American Militarism.
The total defence budget is bigger than that of all other nations combined.
“During the entire Cold War era, from 1945 through 1988, large-scale US military actions abroad totalled a scant six. Since the fall of the Berlin Wall, however, they have become almost annual events.” ”
Bacevich calls it “the normalisation of war“. He goes on: “Policymakers have increasingly come to see coercion as a sort of all-purpose tool.”

The article compares the one Republican and the two Democratic candidates: McCain is a hero of the Vietnam war who has consistently supported the Iraq war, Clinton is an opportunist doing whatever seems popular at the time, and only Obama has consistently opposed the Iraq war and stated that he wants to change America’s attitudes away from militarism, which routinely sees the military option as the option of first choice.

Past wars were bad and killed many millions, wars may be far worse in the more crowded world of the future with its more destructive weapons. The United States, with its scientific, technological and economic power, could change the world for the better, and for the far worse, since it becomes more likely that the use of nuclear weapons will not be anathema in future wars (see here).

The report in the Sydney Morning Herald does not mention the numbers of casualties in the various military excursions. Are they of concern to McCain? Here are the latest figures for Iraq (higher figures have been given, and I don’t think that they include the casualties indirectly caused by the invasion, for example due to the almost complete breakdown of the medical system, such as baby mortality):
Although the most dangerous regions of Iraq could not be sampled, new estimates arrive at a death toll of 1 million Iraqis since the beginning of the invasion.

Japan is not the only sinner, Norway plans to kill 1052 minke whales in 2008 for managing fish stocks, the same quota as in 2007. Could this (managing fish stocks) be behind the Japanese whaling program as well? I suggest we all cut back on our seafood consumption to save the whales. On the other hand, there may be problems with this too: we might need more soya products, and soya beans are best grown in what are now rainforests in the Amazon and Indonesia. Which shows that preaching about the “majesty” of the creatures we kill etc. does not lead anywhere. We need an approach that solves the economic-social-political problems of the world leading to enormous waste in some countries and hunger in others (see here).

“Norway resumed whaling in 1993, arguing that hunting is necessary to prevent the minke whale population from growing so large that it threatens fish stocks.
Minke whales are the smallest of the seven great whales. They are up to 11 metres long, and can weigh about 8 tons.”

Full article in the Sydney Morning Herald, 8.7.08.

See my previous posts on whale hunting.

Two recent articles by Gisela Kaplan, a Professor at the University of New England, in The Australian, January 30, and
The Australian, February 7, emphasise the major argument against whale hunting, namely the possible high intelligence and emotional complexity of whales.

Some extracts here:

Brains of whales hard-wired for compassion (January 30)

“It is relatively difficult to study the cognitive ability of whales but their brains have been studied in some detail. Like us, they have a neocortex but they have fewer neurons and more glial cells than we have. In the past few years, the scientific world has been excited by the discovery that humpback, fin, killer and sperm whales have spindle cells once thought to be unique to humans and apes.

In fact, whales have more and larger spindle cells. These cells in the brain are said to be responsible for making one capable of feeling complex emotions (love, intuition, grieving, awareness of others suffering pain) and have apparently a part to play in speech and in social decisions.

All this, to scientists, is beginning to consolidate a suspicion that whales may be among the smartest of mammals and may be capable of empathy and compassion. And this, to scientists, is awe-inspiring because it breaks down barriers we have erected between humans and animals.”

No sense in killing whales for science (February 7)

“Whale hunting in today’s age is immoral to the extreme and sheer greed in the presence of plenty. Carried out under the guise of research, it also does a great disservice to the science of the study of animals.”
…”The discovery of spindle cells in fin whales, as reported in my last blog, means that fin whales (50 of these precious whales are to be slaughtered this year) may have complex emotions and high levels of cognition. ¨We cannot learn about the whales’ cognitive abilities, or much about anything else, for that matter, by killing them.”

However, whale hunting is possibly not more harmful to whale populations than the agony to which whales may be exposed by seismic shocks used for underwater oil exploration and submarine exercises using sonar booms (see my two previous blogs). This does not justify whale hunting, but it points to the need to expose and stop other potentially harmful activities as well.

As an afterthought: cows (sheep I am not so sure) always struck me as being fairly intelligent, and there are records of bulls almost frightened to death when approaching the slaughterhouse. How do their emotions compare with those of whales? Look at the inhumane conditions under which sheep and cows are transported in Australia, and live on ships to overseas destinations.

Various Australian high-ranking politicians, from Kevin Rudd downwards, have used strong words condemning Japanese whaling. Is it possible that Australian activities endanger whales more than the Japanese fishing fleet does?

I have discussed the effects of exercises by the US navy on whales in a previous post. Australian protesters, to my knowledge, have so far been active only against the Japanese whaling fleet, using methods which some think amount to piracy. New information on threats to the blue whale has now turned up.

According to the Sydney Morning Herald 2.2.08 (full article here):

Oil survey explosions a threat to sick whales

“THE EFFECT of seismic exploration on Australia’s best-known blue whale feeding ground is set to intensify, just as signs emerge that the endangered ocean giants are increasingly sick.
Surveys with exploding airguns are planned for 5900 square kilometres of waters that blue whales use at the same time, off Victoria and South Australia.
Whales avoid seismic noise and concern is growing that these blue whales will miss out on prime feeding opportunities. Some already show signs of being emaciated and parasite-ridden, scientists studying them say.
A Melbourne company, Exoil, is seeking approval for the seismic work following the Rudd Government’s decision before Christmas to permit a much smaller 320 square-kilometre survey by Woodside in the same waters.”

………

“The International Fund for Animal Welfare said following the Woodside decision, approval of the survey could send a bad signal internationally. “If Australia is going to be asking Japan to stop whaling, we need to make sure our own house is in order,” said the fund’s campaign manager, Darren Kindleysides.”

Dies ergänzt meinen letzten Post über Deutsche Weisheit, Deutsche Dummheit (für frühere siehe hier und hier).

Ich stelle hier die Frage, ob das, was einige berühmte Deutsche in der Vergangenheit von uns (und damit sich selbst) dachten, immer noch stimmt. So dachten Grillparzer, Hebbel und Benn (Fettdruck von mir):

Franz Grillparzer 1841. “Gespräch im Elysium zwischen Friedrich dem Grossen und Lessing” (aus “Tintenfass”, Diogenes Zürich 1981):
“Friedrich: Lessing, komm herab!
Lessing: Seid Ihr es, Sire?
Friedrich: Ich ennyuiere mich und habe Lust zu plaudern.
Lessing: Und wenn ich meinesteils nun keine Lust dazu hätte?
Friedrich: Du musst dich eben fügen. Denk, ich war ein König.
Lessing: Und ich ein deutscher Gelehrter. Ich füge mich.
…………………

Friedrich Hebbel (etwa Mitte des 19.Jahrhunderts) (aus Jürg Drews: “Neu im Zynischen Wörterbuch”,”Tintenfass”, Diogenes Zürich 1981)
“Selbst im Fall einer Revolution würden die Deutschen sich nur Steuerfreiheit, nie Gedankenfreiheit zu erkämpfen suchen”

Gottfried Benn (Briefe an F.W.Oelze, 1932-1956, aus Gottfried Bennn Porträts,”Tintenfass”, Diogenes Zürich 1981).
Über E. Jünger “…..Er hat ja offenbar viel Zulauf u. viele Bewunderer, gilt als unterdrücktes u. verkanntes Genie, aber das ist hierzulande, wo immer auf das falsche Pferd gesetzt wird, nichts Besonderes….”

Also, der Deutsche hat anscheinend den Ruf, nicht gerne selbst zu denken, sich zu “fügen”, wenn eine Autorität das verlangt, und gewohnheitsmässig “auf’s falsche Pferd zu setzen”. Hier ist die Gelegenheit, das Gegenteil zu beweisen. Gemäss dem Spiegel online, 31.1.08:

“Der Brief hat acht Seiten, die Sprache ist unverblümt: US-Verteidigungsminister Gates verlangt nach SPIEGEL-Informationen vom deutschen Kollegen Jung Kampftruppen für Süd-Afghanistan. Im Ministerium findet man das drastische Schreiben unverschämt - beim anstehenden Nato-Gipfel kommt es zum Schwur.” (der vollständige Spiegel-Artikel ist hier zu finden).

Sollte man jemandem, der sich anscheinend für einen Kenner der deutschen Charakterschwächen hät (anders ist die Unverschämtheit des Briefes kaum zu interpretieren), eine Abfuhr erteilen? Die Invasian Afghanistans war genau so unethisch wie die des Iraq; warum soll Deutschland sich an der Fortsetzung der angelsächsischen Kolonialpolitik im Nahen Osten beteiligen? Afghanistan ist noch nie auf die Dauer von Kolonialmächten besetzt worden. Ganz offensichtlich setzen die USA auf das falsche Pferd. Schröder und Fischer hatten Recht mit ihrer Iraq-Politik, wollen wir hoffen, dass Merkel und Steinmeier das richtige in Afghanistan tun. Vielleicht kann Ihnen der afghanische Präsident den Rücken stärken, der öffentlich erklärt hat, Afghanistan brauche nicht mehr ausländische Soldaten, sondern eine stärkere afghanische Armee.