What was the line between being a Buccaneer and a Pirate?
It was fuzzy, but it mostly seemed to involve having a royal charter from some seafaring nation or other, and an agreement not to sack their ships - everyone else was fair game.
But just like modern online video technology was spurred by porn and our efforts to improve online privacy have been spurred by the Obama administration, in order to stay one step ahead of a well-armed navy, swashbucklers had to use the latest advances.
And they did. From current, wind, and reef patch information to new species size, coloration, behavioral patterns, and most importantly, edibility, pirates did a lot
Alex Warneke at DeepSeaNews gives us some insight into a truly prominent gangsta of natural history: William Dampier. He was the first to coin the terms Sea Lion, sub-species, avocado and his is the first documentation of the effects of marijuana.
Subscribe to the newsletter
[x]
Stay in touch with the scientific world!
Know Science And Want To Write?
Apply for a column: writing@science20.com
Donate or Buy SWAG
Please donate so science experts can write
for the public.
At Science 2.0, scientists are the journalists,
with no political bias or editorial control. We
can't do it alone so please make a difference.
We are a nonprofit science journalism
group operating under Section 501(c)(3)
of the Internal Revenue Code that's
educated over 300 million people.
You can help with a tax-deductible
donation today and 100 percent of your
gift will go toward our programs,
no salaries or offices.
- Brits Associate Accents With Crime But Trust Scottish Accents Most
- EPA Should Scuttle Anti-Science PFAS Claims
- Smoking Marijuana Is Both Smoking And Drugs - Stop Doing It Around Children
- Kennedy's MAHA Is A Solution With No Problem
- USDA Awards Grant To Study Acidic Coatings To Protect Organic Food From Bacteria
- No, Trump’s Executive Orders Can’t Cancel Your Rights.
- New Bacteria Optimization Could Boost Nitrogen-Fixing In Corn
Interesting insights from outside Science 2.0
© 2025 Science 2.0
Comments