Namibian fairy circle debate rages on: Sand termites or Turing mechanism?
arstechnica.com
arstechnica.com
[0] https://www.chemistryworld.com/features/turing-patterns/4991...
Many people don't know Turing did other things. Doesn't make it clickbait.
https://theconversation.com/first-peoples-knowledge-of-myste...
It is mind boggling the time period over which tribal knowledge develops.
The 50,000 year deep indigenous knowledge being discussed there isn't magical sky friends, it's deep ecological knowledge about plants, animals, and where to find food and water where no outsiders would think to look.
you can't convincingly tell the scientific story of the advantages of adaptive evolution without realizing that stories told over and over again must have been adaptions, they're too much of a waste otherwise. We like listening to stories. Why? you said it best.
>it surely must be truth
It's rare to see an error in the opening sentence of an article, and maybe a nitpick but I believe "bushmen" usually refers to San hunter-gatherer nomads, not Bantu language-speaking pastoralists.
(I’m very closely connected to one of the foremost Western experts on the Himba and have spent time with them myself. Definitely not the same as the Bushmen.)
This is such a strange sentence that makes it sound like they're some exotic, uncontacted people. Give it a couple of hours until its waking hours in Namibia, and we're going to have Himba people in this thread.
And I thought it was implied, but I was talking about Himba people who live traditionally, which sort falls under the “out in the bush” heading. Not too many of them hanging out on HN.
So is bushmen. Which does attempt to refer to the San people. It is also considered rude.
It depends on how it is used though. The San council in SA is ok with it’s use in positive contexts.
They have other names by which they refer to themselves.like !Kung. These represent their individual nations.
Himbas don’t have the same language or history as San/Bushmen. Also Himbas raise cattle .. So you are correct that the term “Himba bushmen” is very off. (Although I’m not familiar with Himba’s preferred names)
It’s a very western / German thing to talk like this with out knowing the full context and just assuming “hey they live in the bush lol bushmen”
Myself and others have witnessed these at native orchid sites and one pattern is that orchids don't grow within the ring; it seems the expanding ring consumes nutrients within, eating outwardly as it expands. This in itself is interesting because typically terrestrial orchids have a heavy symbiotic relationship with fungi. There are interesting physical similarities I can see here; a robustness on the perimeter due to higher nitrogen availability, and more barrenness within the interior.
The species in this case is Leucopaxillus giganteus, which is edible, and due to the unique fairy rings, unusually easy to identify. Though I still don't dare try them because only young specimens are edible and mature ones are known to contain KCN...
One of the features I caught on film are “mima mounds”. To this day I license these images over and over again because the mechanism that shapes the mounds is hotly debated. I had no idea what they were at the time, but it is fascinating.
It’s also fascinating that conversations and debates around these kinds of mysterious features just keeps on going.
This seems like the simplest explanation, especially with desert plants with high water efficiency. I’d think that would give groups of such plants a higher ‘surface tension’ leading to a more defined, circular boundary.
> 2 and 12 metres (7 and 39 ft) in diameter
according to WP
Since we're just suggesting whack science, let's get soil from the Bermuda Triangle and replace it with the fairy circles to see if they are spawn points.