14 comments

[ 5.4 ms ] story [ 32.2 ms ] thread
If you don't mind a good amount of screaming in your music (or if you're particularly worked up and need some screaming), there's a song called "Boiled Frogs" by Alexisonfire that is about this topic. Very very good.

In other news, this exact topic is my biggest fear in the world. I hope I never wake up 20 years later and realize I've been doing the exact same thing the whole time.

Original: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kgkMlEn8L2E

Acoustic: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPlP-M1WEik

One the singers was writing about his father slowly being overworked so that he'd quit and give up his pension.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiled_Frogs

"And my mother went to this conference talking to different generations in the workplace and they referred to her generation as 'boiled frogs.' The analogy is that if you take a frog and put it in boiling water, it will jump right out immediately, but if you put it in cold water and then you slowly turn the heat up, they'll just eventually fall asleep and die. Same way with people in the workplace. If it's too hectic when they first get there, they'll just quit and get another job, but if you slowly up the workload, lower the pay, they're more likely to sit there and just boil."

(Sorry, I really like the song)

dude, yes. Thank you for posting those links.

Do you listen to George Pettit's other band (he's the singer) City and Colour? Wayyyyy different then AOF but really freakin good too

I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that this was posted due to the discussion here: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1174036 about whether the boiling frog story is true or not.

tl;dr - it is.

That's not a good summary. The frog story is dubious.
How so? It was published in peer-reviewed journals. The modern debunker was unaware of the previous experiments, and they messed up the protocol, so their debunkings are illegitimate. What's dubious about it?
BTW, that last question would be better answered with a comment that has an actual argument rather than a bare assertion with no evidence, or moderation. Facts are facts. They don't give a shit which arrow you click.
You pointed to a previous discussion, about a point on which there was disagreement, and then said, "tl;dr - the side of that argument that I was on is right."

That's not a good summary of what you linked to.

Actually, it is, because I was right. At least nobody tried to make a rebuttal.
"In 1869, while doing experiments searching for the location of the soul, German physiologist Friedrich Goltz demonstrated that a frog that has had its brain removed will remain in slowly heated water, but his intact frogs attempted to escape the water"

I tried to do this with an human. Once I removed his brain he stop perceiving danger... it must be a coincidence.

Lesson learned: don't let them remove your brain

To clarify, that wasn't the experiment the story is based on.
Yeah I know, I just thought it was a pretty funny experiment though
I can't believe that page doesn't feature my favourite bad film dialogue quote, from the volcano disaster movie Dante's Peak:

Harry Dalton: My 9th grade science teacher always said that if you put a frog in boiling hot water, it would jump out, but put it in cold water, and heat it up gradually, it would slowly boil to death.

Nancy: Your recipe for frog soup?

Harry Dalton: No. It's my recipe for a disaster

PiratFrog >>> Un-hacker-algerien-a-pirate-le-site-internet-de-la-Banque-d-Israel-ou-il-a-poste-un-message-pour-denoncer-la-politique