Monday, May 21, 2012

Comment Policy

Mine is,
Walk right in, take your shoes off, set a spell.  If I don't like a comment you made, I might scold you or even delete it (rare).  My digital home, my decision.

16 Comments:

Blogger Machinist said...

I'm glad to see you posting again. I hope the eye is something that will recover.

Thu May 24, 01:18:00 AM  
Blogger nk said...

Thank you, Machinist. It is promising. There is no retinal damage. There is still cloudiness but the worst of the black spots are gone. I live, I drive. Carefully.

Thu May 24, 08:37:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Japanese were really boll weevils looking for a home around 600 AD."

The languages of Eurasia have arisen over time following successive waves of migration from the steppes. Forget the technical term of linguistics.

Some like Basque admit of no clear relatives or origin. But apart from Maygar, Indo European family includes Greek, German and Hindi owing to an expansion somewhere around 2500 BC out of the steppes.

Generally the more distant the relatives the earlier the migration.

Finnish and Japanese are more closely related to each other than any extant other, I think the term was 'of Altaic origin' but check.

Their originating migration was quite a bit earlier than the IndoEuropean.

So 10,000 BC might have been the Ainu, or a completely lost lineage, not 'Japanese' per se.

Sat May 26, 06:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see by your discussion of steels that you have more interest than I gave you credit for.

I could have remembered 'steel' when 'iron' was stipulated for 10,000 BC but iron requires no real chimney and the pictures I recall, if reconstructed, seemed several times the hearth in height.

Sat May 26, 07:35:00 PM  
Anonymous nk said...

I am no real historian, but 10,000 BC I would still have in the Mesolithic at best, or Paleolitihic depending on the area. At arounnd 1,200 BC, the Trojan war was fought with bronze weapons. I believe 1,000 BC is a good rough estimate for the Iron Age.

Sat May 26, 10:48:00 PM  
Blogger Machinist said...

Anonymous,
Are you saying you could melt iron without a chimney or bellows using wood or coal fires?

Sun May 27, 01:04:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, Machinist.

You can soften iron with a bellows powered forge, but you need a blast furnace or crucible to smelt it.

I used a propane torch. Very thin blades, already ground to a polish.

What our ancestors did, they used the first two gifts from Prometheus -- fire and hammer. ~_~

Sun May 27, 01:31:00 AM  
Anonymous nk said...

Machinist,

That previous anonymous was me, but not the others.

Sun May 27, 01:34:00 AM  
Blogger Machinist said...

Forging is one thing but you have to melt it to smelt it or mold the ingot you forge. Your comment about chimneys seemed to imply you thought they could do this without an enhanced or forced draft.

"iron requires no real chimney"

Did I misunderstand this?

Sun May 27, 01:37:00 AM  
Blogger Machinist said...

The migration "Anonymous" or the steel "Anonymous"?

Sun May 27, 01:39:00 AM  
Anonymous nk said...

This one, Machinist:

" Anonymous said...
Hey, Machinist.

You can soften iron with a bellows powered forge, but you need a blast furnace or crucible to smelt it.

I used a propane torch. Very thin blades, already ground to a polish.

What our ancestors did, they used the first two gifts from Prometheus -- fire and hammer. ~_~

Sun May 27, 01:31:00 AM"

Sun May 27, 02:38:00 AM  
Blogger Machinist said...

That is why it seemed at odds with the earlier comment.

It seems I missed the discussion referred to in any case.

Sun May 27, 02:43:00 AM  
Anonymous nk said...

Well, a blast furnace is basically a chimney. Layers of fuel and ore, open at the bottom to suck in air, open at the top to continue the vacuum. In the end you have dirty metal, ranging from cast iron to mild steel, in hardness. Smiths will separate it and make it into tea kettles, gratings, or scalpels.

We did the same thing to cook rocks for cement where I was, a bit ago.

Sun May 27, 03:52:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It would seem, after a brief review, that my(gg) Finnish-Japanese link is pure speculation.

Two sides to the issue, genetic and linguistic; language is obviously not tied to genes.

The Sami are no more closely related to the Siberians than Europeans generally, but they are genetically isolated and presumed earlier residents.

The Japanese are via haplogroup D4, mother origin is 50% Ainu, arriving by 14,000 AD. Haplogroup D2, father origin, is 50% Korean Mongolian arriving in waves.

Finnish-Estonian is often assigned to the Uralian-Urgic group on scant evidence just proximity. Japanese is sometimes assigned to Altaic group, but the group itself is as yet poorly defined and established by any model.

So no evidence of Finnish-Japanese genetic tie or linguistics, just coincidence pointing to study.

Sun May 27, 02:20:00 PM  
Anonymous nk said...

I am a former Nipponfile. Konichi Wa.

Altaic-Turkic is itself questioned as a language group, like I believe you are saying.

I do not know about the Finns or the Basques, but when young I lived somewhat close to Vlachs whose language also does not seem to fit any category.

Sun May 27, 04:28:00 PM  
Anonymous nk said...

I must protest, though, any insistence that the Japanese we know settled the islands before 600AD. Exterminating the Ainu in the process.

Sun May 27, 04:34:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home