Top 20 Amazing Science Facts

1. deep - December 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

FIRST!

2. deep - December 19th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

YES FINALLY I BEAT EVERYONE! GREAT LIST THOUGH.

3. deep - December 19th, 2007 at 2:41 pm

i think its supposed to be Rompelberg.

4. Bruno - December 19th, 2007 at 2:45 pm

I’m pretty sure number 16. According to http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/spiders.asp, this type of urban legend was started by a columnist who, in order to prove how gullible the internet has made people, said that people eat 8 spiders a year in their sleep. I believe this claim is an extension of that assertion.
The only way I can see this to be true is if:
A. The word “bugs” are applied liberally to microscopic organisms, in which case we eat millions of bacteria anyway.
B. This includes people who eat insects to subsist, but then that would eliminate the “accidentally” part of the claim.
C. There is a portion of the global population (probably in jungle areas) that accidentally eats large amounts of insects which offsets most people’s little to no ingestion.

Anyway, I hope for a response on the origins of this one.

5. Bruno - December 19th, 2007 at 2:46 pm

Hmmm, that post looks odd. It was supposed to read “I’m pretty sure number 16 is an urban legend” without all that stretching.

6. chershey - December 19th, 2007 at 2:47 pm

Deep is right. It’s Rompelberg.

7. mike - December 19th, 2007 at 3:01 pm

#14 should be considered speculation…not fact. There is literally NO way to honestly prove that…

8. Cyn - December 19th, 2007 at 3:02 pm

thanks guys!

its corrected to the right name now and page loads fine for me. anyone else having problems?

if so….try clearing cache or hit page refresh.

9. Ashley - December 19th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

WOW, glad to know that we won’t be running out of salt anytime soon

I would love to see a polar bear jump, sounds cute!

10. wetsocks - December 19th, 2007 at 3:36 pm

I love number 4. Astronomy stuff always blows my mind.

11. Csimmons - December 19th, 2007 at 3:42 pm

I’m movin’ with JFrater to Sagittarius B too, gonna be one kick ass party:)

12. Csimmons - December 19th, 2007 at 3:46 pm

It’s funny, #16 says you accidently eat 430 bugs a year, today i was running and took a breath,A FLY FLEW IN MY MOUTH!!!, I threw up like 3 times, but my friend laughed, looks like #16 may be right:)

13. Gravy - December 19th, 2007 at 4:26 pm

Number 4 riminded me of a fact my science teacher taught me. If we took the space out of every atom or molecule that made up the washington monument, it would be the size of a one pound bag of flour (but of course would still have the same weight).

14. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 4:48 pm

I don’t understand this ‘first post’ thing. It’s hardly a worthy challenge.

How aboout trying to get the last post?

Currently, I’m winning on this list…

15. Juggz - December 19th, 2007 at 5:01 pm

I agree with the first post thing it never made any sense. it must be just a natrual competition and because of it first posts on most websites are useless and uninformative. now you want a challenge i say shoot for first post BUT with somethig to contribute to the list in general its almost impossible because you always have somebody saying…FIRST POST. I find it hillarious when the 2nd and 3rd posts say FIRST POST.

16. Juggz - December 19th, 2007 at 5:02 pm

oh yah….. now im winning

17. Tlmabp - December 19th, 2007 at 6:06 pm

I love trivia list that is why I love this site!!
the first one doesnt make sense to me.

18. Ruairi - December 19th, 2007 at 6:27 pm

winning.

wooooooooooooooooooo

19. teacherman - December 19th, 2007 at 6:37 pm

Please explain #4, I can’t wrap my head around it. I am trying to visualize it and am struggling!

20. Kelsi - December 19th, 2007 at 7:04 pm

“13. Polar Bears can run at 25 miles an hour and jump over 6 feet in the air”

Horses can run 45, jump over 7, and are also better.

Haha, really interesting list though, love it! What about the larget organism on Earth being a mushroom (or some sort of fungus) living in Washinton or Oregon in a state park? That’s pretty cool. I don’t remember what it’s called though, and I’m too lazy to go look it up at the moment.

21. nelia - December 19th, 2007 at 7:04 pm

Ashley - your first thought was that the polar bear jumping sounded cute, my first thought was about how screwed i would be if i ever met a polar bear. 25 mph? those things are badass, and they even get two of the twenty amazing facts

22. seymour - December 19th, 2007 at 7:14 pm

Number one…what dimensions are you talking about? Surely you aren’t saying all humans have the same dimensions of blood vessels? Not trying to call you a liar (for I do believe it is true), but a little qualifying is in order.

23. 20Fan20 - December 19th, 2007 at 7:36 pm

hey if you dont appreciate being number one to a post that is fine, just wait a few minutes until one of us post first! It is just a fun competition type thing.

As far as how cool it is? Well it sure beats the hell out of 23!

24. SubliminalDeath666 - December 19th, 2007 at 7:39 pm

Kelsi: We can’t ride polar bears!!! Only horses, camels, and elephants!! That’s what makes them so cool.

25. amoondoo - December 19th, 2007 at 8:02 pm

“The interstellar gas cloud Sagittarius B contains a billion, billion, billion liters of alcohol”

how is this possible?

it is amazing

26. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 8:36 pm

First Post.

27. el duderino - December 19th, 2007 at 9:03 pm

I used to run a salad bar and I would bet that on average every salad had at least a 50/50 chance of having some sort of critter in it, no matter how well we washed it. Bon appetite!
You could ride a polar bear if you could somehow convince him not to eat you first, a big male polar bear is certainly strong and big enough to carry an adult human.

28. kate - December 19th, 2007 at 9:10 pm

Bugs in salad, or most often in our beers, for some reason dont seem to worry us much here in Australia. Cries of “dont worry mate, he wont drink much”!! will resound around the room, the bug removed, and the festivities continue. What doesnt kill us makes us stronger eh? Cheers, Kate

29. PANIC - December 19th, 2007 at 9:19 pm

WOW. I must say its extremely refreshing to run into posters who are critical and run everything they hear past snopes first. My friends are constantly sending me emails about missing children from 1994 and Bill gates sending out a penny for every person forwarded! That said, the bug thing (16) I would think is the most impossible thing to figure out. It would really depend on climate, diet, and sanitary conditions, all vary greatly in north america. This is an amazing list tho!! Great job!!

30. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 9:20 pm

No. 14, doesn’t make sense to me.

I we had a common ancestor 60 million years ago, then surley we still have a common ancestor?

It’s like saying ‘Earlier on I got out of bed 20 minutes ago’.

Discuss.

31. Mom424 - December 19th, 2007 at 10:12 pm

semantics, semantics
should have said we share a common ancestor that lived 65 million years ago…..
the blood vessel thing includes capilliaries, those suckers are microscopic, but plentiful

32. sdggrant - December 19th, 2007 at 10:17 pm

fgds, this morning I got out of bed.
Did I still get out of bed if it isnt morning still?

See, same thing

33. Kelsi - December 19th, 2007 at 10:31 pm

fgds: I think it means that the common ancestor existed 60 million years ago. In which case, your statement would be something like, “I was in bed 20 minutes ago.” ? haha, right?

34. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 10:41 pm

Ahh I see. It’s stated a bit confusingly I suppose. But I can’t really be pedantic considering most of my posts look like they’ve been sprayed with an anit-grammer machine gun.

sdggrant, you kind of made my own point better than I did there! How about this, It’s like saying ‘Twenty minutes ago I had been out of bed for twenty minutes’ instead of saying ‘I’ve been out of bed for 40 minutes’

In other news, Polar bears are awesome.

35. Mom424 - December 19th, 2007 at 10:46 pm

Polar bears are awesome, and extremely threatened,
global warming is reducing/removing the ice pack, where they hunt for seals…

36. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 10:50 pm

I thought seals where threatened too.
Catch 22.

37. sdggrant - December 19th, 2007 at 11:11 pm

lol, i agre polar bears are awesome.

FGDS, the english language is supposedly the hardest language to learn because of all of the crazy rules and different meanings. This is an example o something worded more or less correctly, and still being confusing.

38. reg123456 - December 19th, 2007 at 11:16 pm

16. The average person accidentally eats 430 bugs each year of their life

I would love to know how people come up with that number cause does some scientist follow people around secretly checking if there’s a bug in their food? And if so, to that scientist I’d like to say “GET A LIFE DUDE!!”

39. sdggrant - December 19th, 2007 at 11:18 pm

I think it is safe to say that people eat a lot of bugs during their life time, intentional or not. It would be nice to find out how somebody came up with the number 430 though.

40. reg123456 - December 19th, 2007 at 11:19 pm

P.S. I agree with Mike (post 7). That’s the theory of evolution being referred to as a fact, as usual. Don’t get me wrong, I believe in the process of evolution, but as Mike said, a theory is a theory, and should not be written as if it was a verified law.

41. fgds - December 19th, 2007 at 11:21 pm

If you sum that number with the amount I intentionally eat, then my annual total is in the thousands.

42. torn and frayed - December 20th, 2007 at 12:44 am

mike and reg123456- we CAN and DO KNOW for FACT about these things due to DNA! And “theory” does not mean “best guess” I’m sorry science threatens your world view.

Also, 430 bugs a year? that’s more than one a day. I doubt it would be that many accidentally eaten, but it is probably more than we’d like to know.

43. dangorironhide - December 20th, 2007 at 1:30 am

teacherman (#19): To (very) roughly answer your question, a neutron star is (funnily enough) made up almost entirely of neutrons, with a few other particles. If you think of the amount of space in an atome, then take out all that space (and the protons & electrons), you have a neutron star.

From wikipedia:
“neutron stars have overall densities of 8.4×1016 to 1×1018 kg/m³, which compares with the approximate density of an atomic nucleus of 3×1017 kg/m³.”

Which means that neutron stars are composed almost entirely of the particles in the nucleus of an atom.

44. Mav - December 20th, 2007 at 1:41 am

I did not know about #1 and #20. They are very interesting facts.

45. Damian - December 20th, 2007 at 4:32 am

reg123456: Scientist can’t prove with DNA that 2 species shared a common ancester. There may be some similarities in our DNA that would point to that being the fact, but it is most certaintly not proven beyond a doubt.

teacherman: Every mass you see here on earth is made up of elements. These elements have protons and electrons (in addition to neutrons). Since protons and electrons have equal but opposite charges, they attract each other. The electrons then form orbits around the protons (with are located in the nucleus with the neutrons). These electron orbits take up millions of times the space of the nucleus. A neutron star doesn’t have many (if any) electrons so there is no waisted space, and everything is packed nice and tight. So like dangorironhide points out, they have amazingly large densities.

46. Einstein217 - December 20th, 2007 at 6:43 am

Who invited the creationists?

47. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 6:52 am

reg123456;
evolution is not theory, evolution is fact…
the theory lies in what exactly evolved from what…nobody is sure of the EXACT steps but the pattern is undeniable (with a modicum of intelligence and education; and not an education at some yahoo fundamentalist school in the southern U.S.)

48. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 7:07 am

fgds; seals are doing just fine in Canada, at least since they stopped wearing fur. they are actually being blamed for the drop in the Cod stocks. (its not the seals, its overfishing with factory ships, both domestic and foreign). Elephant seals though are suffering great hardships due to the lack of pack ice; thousands have been crushed or otherwise injured because they are all stuck on the shore, no ice to spread out on….

49. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 7:08 am

ps; not that the seals stopped wearing fur, the humans….(if baby harp seals looked like wart hogs, we would still be wearing nice warm fur)

50. Alamo - December 20th, 2007 at 7:16 am

Jfrater-

Number 15 is wrong, or at least mis-stated. Polar bear fur is not “transparent”, and transparency would not make them invisible to infra red.
Polar bear hair is hollow giving it tremendous insulating qualities, therefrore they lose very little body heat. That fact is what makes polar bears difficult or impossible to thermally image or detect.

Mom424- Your gullible devotion to the global warming myth, despite a preponderance of scientific evidence to the contrary, is illustrative of why you would mis-state the status of evolution.

Evolution is in fact a theory- a well founded and supported theory, but a theory nonetheless. Science reaches concensus, and rarely a conclusion, particularly when there are more unanswered questions than those that are plausibly explained- as in the theory of evolution.

Oh, and before you make one of your bigoted statements- I am an agnostic, and a scientist. Stick with parenting “Mom”. or read more.

51. Barabas - December 20th, 2007 at 7:27 am

@Mom424
At least until somebody comes up with a better theory (creationism surely isnt one ).

52. cnorman - December 20th, 2007 at 8:42 am

number 3 is interesting. I once read somewhere that even if humans got to the point where they never aged we would still only live to about 500 becaus of the chance of having an accident

53. Anne - December 20th, 2007 at 9:06 am

i love this list! i do love reading trivias and other interesting facts about nature, astronomy etc… i hope there would be more of these coming?

btw to kelsi, that thing you said about the mushroom? its true, ive read about it. the largest organism on earth extends a mile in length or more if im not mistaken. its called the honey mushroom and is found in oregon.

54. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 9:36 am

Alamo:

I somehow doubt that you are in fact a scientist. A scientist would understand that the terms “theory” and “fact” are not necessarily in opposition. The “theory” of Evolution is a model to explain the evidence we have at hand, and as such it explains the evidence so well, and to such an extent, that it can, actually, be taken as fact. And so it is; the evidence for the correctness of the theory is overwhelming. It is an established fact that organisms evolve; in complex organisms this usually happens over a great span of time, and is therefore difficult to observe… but in bacteria and other simple organisms, it has been very clearly empirically confirmed. The “theory” explains what is plain to see—and is in this sense *fact.*

The “fact” that you call global warming a “myth” and come out with the flat-out LIE that there is a “preponderance of scientific evidence to the contrary” indicates to me that you are not, in fact, a scientist—at least not one who is speaking for the field in which you’ve been trained.

Reading is something you might want to try yourself, therefore.

55. Einstein217 - December 20th, 2007 at 9:50 am

Yea, what Randall said!!!!

56. Csimmons - December 20th, 2007 at 10:07 am

I believe it is safe to say that somewhere in the near future evolution will become a scientific fact, not a theory. I’m a christian and even I believe evolution makes a wholelot more sense than creationism. Plus evolution can back up it’s theory with science and DNA evidence, while creationism can’t.

57. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 10:34 am

alamo
global warming is a fact, what is in contention is weather it is a naturally occurring phenomenon or man made/influenced
and i never insulted you,or anyone, just schools that teach faith as fact
and being a mom is just one of the things i am successful at

58. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 10:35 am

randall, thanks for the back up

59. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 10:41 am

bye and bye
i am not a bigot, i believe assholes come in all colours, religions, and every society ever created on this good earth

60. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 10:45 am

Mom:

You’re welcome. I make it a habit to back up moms when I can… and not just the hot, young, unwed kind.

61. Rick B - December 20th, 2007 at 10:53 am

I don’t buy global warming. Last week we were supposed to get 3 - 5 inches of snow in SC Pennsylvania. This was forecast the night before at 10:30. WE GOT NONE. And you think these morons can tell the Earth is warming? You say the levels of the sea are rising. Poppycock. There is a FINITE amount of water on the planet. NOTHING makes water. If you fill a glass with ice and then top it off with water it won’t overflow - same as Earth. The landmasses could be sinking. Do I need to mention how few hurricanes we had this year? The US Congress just passed an idiot CAFE law that states cars must get 35mpg per manufacturer average. This in a country where the F-150 is the biggest selling vehicle. I recall the enviromentalist nuts wanting us to go to MTBE to “save the planet.” So we pollute our ground water. Brilliant. Now we FINALLY go to ethanol and we have a corn shortage and we are paying hundreds of percent more for something we should be eating instead of BURNING. So, instead of giving excess corn to the people in Africa who need it, we will burn so much that we won’t have enough to feed ourselves. All in the name of global warming. I say the whole damn issue is stupid and just made Al Gore King of Earth since he couldn’t be president.

62. goatmissile - December 20th, 2007 at 10:54 am

My vote goes to Alamo for today’s bumptious terminal valve award.

63. Alamo - December 20th, 2007 at 11:01 am

“Opinion” and “truth” are not necessarily in opposition, and yet, they do not mean the same thing. Semantics aside, my statement concerning the theory of evolution is absolutley correct-and any scientist would gladly admit that. But scientists are much more comfortable operating in the theoretical and don’t consider the label “theory” threatening or diminishing. Political idealogues do consider that characterization a threat to their agendae- They prefer to authoritatively assert absolutes in conjunction with their advocacy.
The “theory” of anthropogenic global warming is demonstrably supported by a minority in the scientific community- That based on a simple survey of peer reviewed published work. No argument, black and white. The fanaticism and fantasy that is “man-made global warming” will soon be dead and buried-prepare yourself.

64. SocialButterfly - December 20th, 2007 at 11:06 am

goatmissile: How about the end of an alimentary canal award…

65. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 11:20 am

‘I make it a habit to back up moms when I can… and not just the hot, young, unwed kind.’ quoth the Randall

*que sleazy 70’s porn flic soundtrack*

gawd where is J?

LOL

need new list…uh, huh

66. Jennie Cameron - December 20th, 2007 at 11:37 am

Rick B.

very interesting point. However, using your example: imagine a bowl of water, if the ice is held partially above and at water level, the ice that is being held above will impact the overall water levels when melted. So consider now the south pole, there is quite a bit of ice held above water level, if this melts it will certainly cause quite the disturbance. Your point is only valid for say.. melting iceburgs which are already at or below water level. Try experimenting for us and let me know the outcome

67. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 11:50 am

Rick B;
good point, and isn’t funny that even with a huge vocabulary and a smattering of latin, bullshit is still bullshit

68. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 12:18 pm

Cyn:

THAT’S what that music was… I kept hearing it, thought I was going crazy…

69. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 12:31 pm

that or Jerry Jeff Walker’s ‘..up against the wall red neck mother..’

ROFLMAO!

70. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 12:38 pm

Alamo:

Listen clown—I’m now even more certain of the correctness of my original guess that you have misrepresented yourself as a “scientist.” Though in point of fact, you *do* write as poorly as some colleagues I know.

Awkardly-applied big words and clumsy latinizing do not an intelligent person make, “Alamo.”

It may be true that scientists don’t find the label “theory” to be threatening, but when biologists find people tossing the word around with a scoffing air, they get their backs up, and rightly so. And I know not a one who feels there are “more unanswered questions” regarding Evolution than “those that are plausibly explained”—as you averred. I detect an agenda of your own underneath your words, “Alamo.”

As for your statements regarding global warming, I can just sense where you’re getting your information from… that line about “a simple survey of peer reviewed published work” is a dead-giveaway. You’re (murkily) claiming that only a “minority” of the “scientific community” supports the anthropogenic theory of global warming—which is simply not true, but then I’ve heard this kind of Big Lie before from those on the far Right… and yet you have the audacity to make disparaging remarks about “politcal ideologues” in the same breath.

Of course you’re revealing yourself to be nothing more than a political shill yourself, and as typical with such people, an ill-informed and grossly biased one at that. (Global warming as “fantasy and fanaticism” as you put it—yes, there’s the objective language of a scientist for you… you are no more a scientist, sir, than I am a tree sloth).

Here’s just ONE site of MANY to contradict you: http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/...../5702/1686

But of course I have not the slightest doubt that you won’t heed what’s said there.

71. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 12:51 pm

Rick B.:

Listen Rick, it’s better to pick up a book and read about the subject you want to go off on (or at least look it up in Wikipedia for god’s sake) before actually going off. The Ken dolls who spew out your daily weather on channel 5 are not the same people who have figured out global warming, okay?

Your point about our “finite” amount of water is nonsensical. Nobody says we’re making more water, pea-brain. It’s that the water that has been locked up in ICE form for the last 10,000 - several million years is now MELTING and feeding back into the oceans—thus causing the overal sea level to rise.

As for the recent CAFE standard you mention–the only thing “idiotic” about it is that it only mandates a rise to 35 mpg… by 2020. A ridiculously low goal to set, when the rest of the world’s auto manufacturers are already beyond that.

72. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 12:52 pm

Cyn:

It’s so nice to see you amusing yourself.

73. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 12:54 pm

oh god! you can see…oh, wait. uh..never mind.

er..just trying to interject some levity into the situation. don’t mind me.

74. gregtake - December 20th, 2007 at 1:03 pm

Alright I may not be a scientist in the litteral term but I am was a science major (Marine Science). There are only a few accepted theories that are considered “fact” by the general consensus of scientists (also known as laws). From the top of my head (although most are from the realm of physics and mathematics), gravitation, pythagorean theorem (yes it says theorem but show me a right triangle…blah blah blah). Can’t think of many more without breaking out some old notebooks from class. Anyways my .02 cents

75. gregtake - December 20th, 2007 at 1:05 pm

Oh and the water metaphor doesn’t make any sense, all it has to do with is the varying densities and volumes of the water relating to temperatures.

76. gregtake - December 20th, 2007 at 1:06 pm

fresh water is most dense at 4 degrees Centigrade, with decreasing densities with increasing and decreasing temperatures…hooray for hydrogen bonds!

77. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Cyn:

I see many things, but I’ll avert my eyes if you’re *really* bashful.

78. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 1:22 pm

i passed ‘bashful’ coupla decades back…lol.

okay, okay..a few decades…

still..this gave me an idea.

-J- listverse chatroom? ROFLMAO!

79. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 1:32 pm

Cyn:

A *few* decades? Are you 80?

I was *never* bashful, in point of fact… I’m not sure if that’s a plus or a minus.

80. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 1:44 pm

*sigh* actually this week makes one month of being 51.

so for this crew…i may as well be freaking ancient.
(i should be so lucky to make 80 too!)

81. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 1:58 pm

Cyn:

Well, you didn’t have to TELL me your age, you know…

I’m coming up on 43, myself… But I don’t feel ancient or even partly ancient. As ever, I just feel young, disdainful, and horny.

82. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 2:02 pm

hey..i make no secret of it. believe i am stunned and amazed to still be here!

‘As ever, I just feel young, disdainful, and horny.’

see…i knew listverse needs a chatroom.

83. Randall - December 20th, 2007 at 2:13 pm

I’m stunned and amazed everytime I wake up in the morning.

“see…i knew listverse needs a chatroom.”

Jamie really should get on that.

84. Csimmons - December 20th, 2007 at 2:25 pm

The last couple of comments i just read sounds like a porn chatroom, guess listverse does need a chatroom

85. Cyn - December 20th, 2007 at 2:31 pm

course none of us has clue one about ‘those kinds’ of chatrooms, right?

now if i could just turn off the cheezy porno soundtrack in my head…

anyway…back to the usual infantile squabbling..i meant..intelligent discussion and debate…

continue…

86. sdggrant - December 20th, 2007 at 2:55 pm

Lord knows I saw a few of those chatrooms back when I was a horny-as-fuck 12 year old.

87. Yarr - December 20th, 2007 at 3:09 pm

Back to the global warming argument…

I for one am not convinced one way or the other, but I know the media and the government to be senational fear-mongers, so I can pretty much tell that if it’s on TV or comes out of a politician’s mouth, it’s 100% bullshit.

Can anyone- anyone at all tell me how and why previous ice ages and melts happened before the internal combustion engine?

Every time anyone on TV is asked that, they avoid the question and start talking about ‘the children’s future’.

Anyone? Anyone?

88. sdggrant - December 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pm

I think it is safe to say that Global warming is a for sure thing. I also think that it is a naturally occuring thing, but I also think that we are helping it along. Maybe Global warming wouldn’t of happened for another 1,000 years (that really is just the blink of an eye when dealing with history and world ‘time’) But it would of happened. It’s just a continuous cycle that we have sped up, Its possible for us to slow it down as well, but it is IMPOSSIBLE to avoid.

89. Csimmons - December 20th, 2007 at 3:41 pm

I still can’t believe Sagittarius B has that much alcohol, as I said before, i’m movin’ there with Jfrater, I could start an intergalactic bar, all are welcome

90. SUN - December 20th, 2007 at 4:42 pm

Strange how you make any claim online without any back up.

(1) A scientist isnt going to identify themselves as “a scientist”, but as a microbiologist, geologist, astronomer, etc.
(2) A scientist knows they arent universally more knowledgable on all aspects of science
(3) If their area of study include said topic, more reason they would identify their field
(4) Scientists arent going to use their occupation to trump or belittle those who disagree, theyre going to use science.
(5) What scientist would go around throwing out the “Im a scientist” card so there, LOL. Maybe and “Im not a scientist but I play one on the internet” one?

91. SUN - December 20th, 2007 at 5:00 pm

“Polar bear hair is hollow giving it tremendous insulating qualities, therefrore they lose very little body heat.”

Thats false. The hollow hair does NOT provide insulation. There is an underlayer of fur that does provide insulation along as does several inches of fat. The hollow hairs instead work as a heating mechanism, trapping and storing the warmth from the sun but they themselves dont insulate. But then again, Im just a mom and not a ’scientist’ LOL.

92. Mom424 - December 20th, 2007 at 5:11 pm

yeah sun
i believe common sense is a prerequisite for being a mom,,,good job

93. Mikerodz - December 20th, 2007 at 5:37 pm

There were subject matters that are better left untouched. It spoils my passing through this life. One of them is Global warming.

94. deep - December 20th, 2007 at 5:45 pm

fgds: HAHA, YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS THAT YOU DIDN’T GET THE FIRST ONE AND NOW THE LAST ONE…

95. deep - December 20th, 2007 at 5:48 pm

JUGGZ: I JUST WANTED TO DO THE FIRST POST THINGY BECAUSE ITS MY FIRST TIME EVER, MADE ME HAPPY…I DO HAVE HAVE SOMETHING USEFUL TO SAY IN THE SECOND AND THIRD POST. AND AS I REMEMBER YOU POSTED “FIRST POST” IN ONE OF THE LISTS HERE AS YOUR FIRST POST…AM I MISSING SOMETHING

96. deep - December 20th, 2007 at 6:04 pm

i found something interesting about human bones.

there are 206 bones in the adult human body and 300 in children (some bones fuse together as we grow). I did not know that.

97. Yarr - December 20th, 2007 at 6:24 pm

Still.
Look at post #87.

Anyone?

Scientist?
Athiest?
Creationist
Pianist?
Meteorologist?
Megablogger?

Anyone got an answer?

98. Kelsi - December 20th, 2007 at 8:53 pm

Yarr: I think the current arguement is that the current warming is, seemingly, I guess, beyond what would have caused the ice age or realease from it or however it works. There are some good arguements out there for this warming period being natural, and I don’t know whether or not we have actually surpassed the natural fluctuations according to the historic records we have, but all the policians and other such believers are projecting crazy numbers for greenhouse gasses and global temperature increases.

I totally hate this topic, why did I even respond? Ugh. We just had to learn a ton on it in my chem class so I feel like I know way more than I ever wanted to, and I’m still really skeptical that it even exists based on what I’ve been told. There are some hard facts out there that completely deflate the whole global warming theory, especially realting to greenhouse gasses, carbon dioxide presence in the atmosphere, and the levels of the atmosphere not warming at the rates they should if greenhouse gasses were really the culprit here. There’s a lot to consider and information is still being gathered and analyzed. I think politics should stay out of it for the time being! But I hate the topic of politics, too. =p (See a pattern here? Maybe I don’t like conflict…who knows.)

99. Kelsi - December 20th, 2007 at 8:55 pm

SubliminalDeath666: “We can’t ride polar bears!!!”

…..SO FAR. Tehe. (PS. Have you read the Golden Comapss? Since it’s so popular right now…they ride polar bears in it!!)

100. Diogenes - December 20th, 2007 at 10:42 pm

i’m not really into extending comments into paragraphes when it is in regards to utter strangers (or to people I dont know for that matter) , so I wont vomit up too much bile with saying;
bjfioghiufdhiuxvinudvbuohdnvohbfvuib
sduvojnzcijovbuyxgvyuxncvbcuyvbchvbjobviudnfvipfnipmdfbl,
spojs98yawhuimvklmiuhudmv,lfmbijdbop,fgbojguhbjodkpgkr
gggggggggggggggppppppppdif90ddfkbopkokfv09bfd9888888888s-
zzzzzzzslf[pdl[psdkofdskofiobjm ,;lx\-0di0-vk b 0-fckbopk kmk
yup
ok
nice list.

101. Kelsi - December 21st, 2007 at 6:55 am

Diogenes: Nice page stretch.

102. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 8:00 am

*puts away broom and dustpan*

must keep the place neat and tidy and between the lines.

103. Csimmons - December 21st, 2007 at 8:15 am

0_0

104. Jorgegrl - December 21st, 2007 at 9:02 am

Awesome list (as usual), but one (albeit somewhat silly) question: for number 12, How many zeros is that??

105. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 9:19 am

as i’ve explained to my daughter, when asked similar questions..’the technical term is ‘gadzillions”

that response is 2nd only to my saying ‘cuz i said so! that’s why!’ when queried by her highness

106. Libertine - December 21st, 2007 at 9:21 am

The bicycle speed was interesting.

107. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 10:35 am

i cant believe i made it a whole day without a list and am still sane!

108. skipps - December 21st, 2007 at 10:47 am

Every hour is a Happy Hour on Sagittarius B!

109. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 10:48 am

Juggz
yes..but what to do about the shakes and the nausea?

110. Csimmons - December 21st, 2007 at 10:52 am

Yeah, I hope some alien opens a huge bar there. Drinks on me!

111. Csimmons - December 21st, 2007 at 10:56 am

On comment #56 I said i was a christian, I am actually Buddhist.

112. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 11:24 am

Cyn: I have battle the Shakes and Nausea with large doses of WoW.

113. evan - December 21st, 2007 at 11:25 am

mmmmmmm WoW

114. evan - December 21st, 2007 at 11:26 am

Horde FTW! lol

115. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 11:51 am

EVAN: its FTH!

116. evan - December 21st, 2007 at 12:08 pm

ewww you an ally?

117. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 12:13 pm

I have An ally but he is in retirement right now im leveign a troll priest(shadow).

118. jfrater - December 21st, 2007 at 12:16 pm

Here is the good news - I will be posting a new list very soon! I need to get used to the timezone changes.

119. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pm

-J- no rush. i’m self medicating w/ tea and chocolate and apparently there are plots afoot in comments re: WoW. we’ll be fine. *brave face*

oh please hurry…*trembling*

120. Randall - December 21st, 2007 at 1:32 pm

Yarr:

You ask why previous icings and warmings happened, sans our human propensity for warming the atmosphere. Well the answer is no one’s sure, but there’s a lot of good guesses. THE POINT, however, about the CURRENT warming is that it is clearly being caused by too much carbon dioxide in the atmosphere (to put it simply) and that the warming is happening very rapidly. There is no evidence (that I’m aware of) in ice cores taken, etc. etc. for previous spikes in carbon dioxide that coincide with previous warmings–therefore, the question is why now? And the answer is, clearly, that we’re doing it.

121. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Cyn: I sense WoW fear!

122. Yarr - December 21st, 2007 at 1:59 pm

Randall:
Oh.
See, my dad has all these old books and encyclopedias he got when my grandmother died.
In the 50’s they said we were at the end of the current ice age and that over the next 50-80 years, Earth’s temperature would steadily increase, and be an average 1-2 degrees warmer by the year 2,000.
It did, just as predicted.
However, now it’s our fault?
I don’t know. Like I said, I’m not convinced one way or the other, I’m just cynical about ANYTHING I see or hear from TV or the government telling me to be afraid, especially when there’s plenty of speculation that we have no effect at all, and LOTS of money to be made by spreading the fear.
*shrug*

123. Yarr - December 21st, 2007 at 2:13 pm

BTW-
I’m not one of those people that want to pave the world or anything. I’m not into strip-mining or clear-cutting or any of that.
I live in Houston, Texas which has some of the worst pollution I’ve ever seen, and I’d like for it to go away.
I just think that it’s pretty ludicrous that while all the petrochemical plants along the (disgusting) beaches here on the Gulf Coast pump out thousands of tons of toxic shit every hour, the government’s solution is to legislate what kind of light bulb I can put in my closet.
Seems like hunting a rhino with a rubber band gun…

124. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 4:11 pm

Juggz..hey my best friend is heavy into WoW…but personally…i loath games like that. *shudder*

125. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 4:12 pm

hehe, then stay away from the forums

126. Cyn - December 21st, 2007 at 4:13 pm

too late *sigh*

127. Juggz - December 21st, 2007 at 4:54 pm

128. SuperLyndsey - December 21st, 2007 at 8:25 pm

A question that I hope a few more educated folks here might like to answer: Why is it that when temperatures rise, the carbon dioxide levels follow that rise, and not the other way around?

129. Darko - December 21st, 2007 at 11:40 pm

Butwhat about the fact that some trees are 3000 to 5000 years old !!!!!!!!

130. Mugg - December 22nd, 2007 at 4:14 am

If polar bears had transparent fur we could see their skin. So it is not transparent fur that makes them invisible for IR cameras, but great thermal isolation which prevents body heat to escape and be captured by IR camera. That is theory. In real life some heat has to escape, at least through exhaling.

So 15 is basically correct, but due to other reasons and not one specified.

131. Randall - December 22nd, 2007 at 9:27 am

Yarr:

Sorry, but it doesn’t surprise me to hear that you’re from Texas. What IS IT with you people down there? (No offense to you personally, I just have a thing against Texans—only in part because of Bush).

To begin with Yarr, environmental problems aren’t mutually exclusive. If you have tons of pollution in your back yard, then by all means, yes, we should take care of it. But there is ALSO a global warming problem that needs to be addressed… why does it have to be one or the other? (As you seem to be saying).

Secondly, you keep saying it’s the media and government telling you about global warming. Uh, Yarr… they are telling you about it NOW because SCIENCE has been talking about it for years, and gathering evidence for it. This is not, therefore, something that has simply been “made up” by news moguls and politicians to sell magazines and papers and control your life.

Now, I can’t address what was written in some encylopedia from 50 some-odd years ago, when I don’t even know the source (what encylcopedia WAS this, for instance?) but I can guess from what you’ve said that you’ve gotten the whole thing mucked up somehow and need to go back and re-read it. First of all, we are and *have been* in an inter-glacial period for about 10,000 years now… so the last age didn’t just end in the 50s, there, pal. “Inter-glacial” means that *based on* what we know of previous ice age cycles, there MAY be and probably WOULD be another ice at some point down the road–how long it would take no one knows for sure. For some reason, however, we know that a few million years ago, the Earth started on a cyclical ice age kick, with ice ages coming and going every few tens of thousands (or more) years. The last ice age (called the Wisconsin or Wurm age) is generally believed to have concluded in the period of about 12,000 - 10,000 years past. Since then we have been warming, but the warming has generally stabilized.

You may have read that we had warmed up from the median low during that ice age, and are now confused by this—I don’t know. But the point is, *during the 50s* and a few decades before that, the consensus was that we were, yes, in a warmer period BECAUSE we were “inter-glacial” (there was a brief cold spell during the 17th and 18th centuries–the “Little Ice Age” it’s been called–which might also be confusing you) but there was not enough LONG TERM meteorological and geological/environmental evidence THEN to judge what was going on—remember, our data collecting hasn’t been going on that long, so it’s only in recent times that we’ve been able to look BACK on previous weather patterns to determine what possible trends have been going on around us–we’ve also made use of new technologies to delve into past weather patterns—technologies that were not available to scientists in the middle of the 20th century.

Remember, please—the point about global warming is that it is caused (to put it simply) by an over-abundance of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. There is NO question that we HAVE been experiencing a rise in this gas over the last few decades AT LEAST… but this phenomena probably goes back to the beginnings of the industrial age, when we began spewing great quantities of carbon into the air. It has taken a while for the buildup of this (carbon, in molecular form, is VERY hard to get rid of–it is *extremely* stable and is not much affected by radiation, etc.–so it doesn’t break down easily and can hang in the atmosphere for a very long time, increasing and increasing as we add more to it) and we have been continually adding to the problem, at increasing rates, over the last few decades. We now have an unusual quantity of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere that was clearly put there by us, and we have an unusually high rate of increase in global temperature. It doesn’t take a lot of genius to understand the connection.

Again, I don’t know what you actually read–but think about it–you’re basically trying to say that science in the 50s (based on what you think you read in some encyclopedia) knew more and knew better than science does today. This is illogical and silly.

132. Cyn - December 22nd, 2007 at 11:13 am

as for TX…we also had Ann Richards, Molly Ivins and can lay claim to Kinky Friedman. to name a few. and i don’t think Shrub was actually born here.

anytime anyone starts badmouthing TX…i just think…where ever you go, there you are. meaning…anyplace has some good stuff and some bad stuff about it. no place is perfect. its all in how you look at it, which is influenced by your own head.

133. Juggz - December 22nd, 2007 at 12:16 pm

Cyn: you actually want us to claim Kinky?

134. Cyn - December 22nd, 2007 at 1:11 pm

Juggz: hey..i almost voted for him!

135. sdggrant - December 22nd, 2007 at 1:32 pm

Actually, Randall, it is scientifically documentated that europe, and many other parts of the world, went through a “mini Ice-age” in the 1800’s. It wasn’t an ice age as i the traditional sense, but global the global temp dropped and europe hit some of its roughest winters to date.

I don’t know a whole lot about it, but I remember learning about it frmo one of my history professors. I read a few articles about it online as well, which I will try to dig up and post links later.

I do agree with you though when you say that we are responsible for alot of the carbon in the air. The Warming is a natural thing, but undoubtedly we are greatly speeding it up.

136. Yarr - December 22nd, 2007 at 1:38 pm

Duh. Me Texas from. Me no know sumpthin ever.

Randall, I agree with you 98% of the time, even though you’re a complete asshole (and kind of a bully).
Thanks for the climatology lesson, but it wasn’t really needed. I simply posed a question, which even after your (I know it’s not personal, because you used parenthesis and everything!) patronizing attack on me, still hasn’t been answered. What’s up with all you know-it-all internet people that you can’t just say “I don’t know” once in a while?
As for the old book, well it’s in a box in a storage unit 200 miles away from me. I didn’t quote it, I just said I read it. I ate a hamburger for lunch. Do you need me to scan and email the receipt to prove it? Is this forum that important to you?

I’m not ‘confused’. I read something in a 60 year old book that said that the Earth would get warmer over time. Lo and behold, it has. The old book attributed it to natural causes. It doesn’t matter. It could have been Curious George for all I care, I just thought it was interesting and decided to share.

I am cynical about the whole global warming thing in the media. In the 30’s it was global cooling. We were all going to freeze to death. Then WWII happened, and all the fearmongers had other things to worry about. I’m cynical of any ‘crisis’ that the people making the most noise about are also the ones who stand to profit from it the most. I choose not to live my life in fear of a falling sky. If that’s what floats your boat, then send all your money to Al Gore for all I care.

And finally, you have a thing against Texans. Whatever. But I have to ask: What exactly is WHAT about people down here? That I read a book? That I’m cynical of the media and government? That I asked a simple question?
(I didn’t vote for that douchebag by the way, so if GW is the reason you don’t like an entire state, you have issues man.)

Oh well, I guess I’m done.
Just one more thing there Randall-
You don’t need to be such an asshole all the time. Take it easy man. Make some cocoa or meditate. Take a hot bath.
It’s just a website dude.

137. Cyn - December 22nd, 2007 at 1:49 pm

just a website? r u serious? this is my life!

138. Yarr - December 22nd, 2007 at 1:55 pm

Some people on here take things a little too seriously. That’s all I’m sayin’

139. Cyn - December 22nd, 2007 at 2:08 pm

Yarr: ya think?

~ ~ ~

i love this site. i really do learn things here. the commentary is mostly enlightening and entertaining too. granted there are some folks who comment that i do wonder why they bother.

people really do need to take a moment to chill and keep things in perspective. this is a site intended to entertain, enlighten and provoke discussion, even debate but NOT incite anger or hate. i do realize some folks use the internet as a place to vent spleen…i just wish they’d do it elsewhere online at places that are designed for that purpose. and not here.

140. jfrater - December 22nd, 2007 at 3:40 pm

Wow - I didn’t realize how much chatter was occurring on this list! I will try to read all the comments later. As for chatrooms - I am happy to set up an IRC server if you are all keen on the idea - or alternatively we could just use a channel on EFnet. Tell me what you want and I will grant your wish!

141. jbjr - December 23rd, 2007 at 4:07 am

Supposedly bug, bug, wastes can be found in various foods - tomato sauce or paste, chocalate syrup, pepper, etc.

Somebody sent me an e-mail with stuff like all humans injest 15? pubic hairs.

Anyway very interesting list.

142. NisseOllson - December 23rd, 2007 at 11:05 am

#14 isn’t a scientific fact

143. Miss Destiny - December 23rd, 2007 at 12:00 pm

Just mentioning I’m glad to see fellow WoW’ers here. (Horde FTW!)

144. amanda - December 23rd, 2007 at 2:00 pm

last post woo hoo

145. jfrater - December 23rd, 2007 at 2:45 pm

amanda: not

146. wowzer - December 23rd, 2007 at 2:49 pm

last ^.^
anyhoo, what I was originally going to say is that you need more of these. LOTS more. Maybe even devote a specific section to random science facts. That’s where you would find me about 98% of the time, I’m estimating (other 2%? Well, I have to come up for other-listly air sometimes.) Yay for listverse!

147. deep is a fag - December 23rd, 2007 at 3:28 pm

who gives a shit if your first to comment? if you dont have anything meaningful to say stfu.

148. kittym - December 23rd, 2007 at 4:32 pm

Comment #147: The word “hypocrite” comes to mind …

149. jfrater - December 23rd, 2007 at 4:42 pm

I am going to have to write a guideline for comments soon - banning FP, LP, and signatures

150. Cyn - December 23rd, 2007 at 5:41 pm

er…sigs i get but what are FP and LP?

151. Haekel - December 23rd, 2007 at 5:56 pm

#14 - dolphins and humans share a common ancestor, that isn’t science, that is someone’s belief. That shouldn’t have been in there. Now if you want to believe that, knock yourself out. You can also believe a pineapple and a porcupine share a common ancestor. I don’t care. But don’t call that science!

152. Diogenes - December 23rd, 2007 at 6:46 pm

Heakel-I think what we find complex will become basic and when the full circle closes in, from the end to the start, it wont matter one way or the other.

but I know what you may be saying and I betcha there was a scientific study out there in which this statement may have been based.

sometimes I am led into thinking that wherever we turn our attention, a suitable reflection will occur.

153. Diogenes - December 23rd, 2007 at 6:49 pm

come now Juggs…, Nobody can claim Kinky.

154. sdggrant - December 23rd, 2007 at 7:09 pm

#147 you should follow your own advice…

155. jfrater - December 23rd, 2007 at 7:35 pm

Cyn: first post / last post

156. Cyn - December 23rd, 2007 at 9:35 pm

thanx J

157. jamie - December 23rd, 2007 at 9:38 pm

reg123456 (#40): evolution is a theory? if evolution is a ‘theory’ then you better think that religion is a theory also. which you cant -also- honestly prove it.

158. Specboy - December 23rd, 2007 at 9:47 pm

What is the volume of the atmosphere that the CO2 is collecting in? I have a feeling it is an incredible number. Like an algae bloom in water, wouldn’t plants help balance an overabundance of CO2?

I don’t buy the fact that we could raise CO2 levels that much (not saying they need to go up much to hurt) Just sounds like we’re going to die from CO2 poisoning, if you believe the description.

ps Statistics are stupid. 1 in 5 people on earth are Chinese, I THOUGHT my brother looked a bit odd…..

159. Yarr - December 24th, 2007 at 12:11 am

Jamie:
Evolution is a theory. That’s why it’s called the ‘Theory of Evolution’.
Not arguing, just saying.
Religion isn’t a theory, it’s a belief.
Totally different things…

160. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 4:39 am

jfrater : “I am happy to set up an IRC server if you are all keen on the idea - or alternatively we could just use a channel on EFnet”

Yes !! An IRC chan would be cool!!

“…banning FP, LP, and signatures”

Ban the sigs…but not the FP, please! It’s kinda slashdotty, dontcha think (which is also cool). Besides, there has to be a FP, even if it is some lamer saying “FP”.

Just my 2c

161. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 4:49 am

Jenny Cameron - “imagine a bowl of water, if the ice is held partially above and at water level, the ice that is being held above will impact the overall water levels when melted.”

Your comment would be clearer if you are more specific as to whether you are referring to ice that is already floating or ice that is on land. If the ice is already floating, then the laws of density and specific gravity would suggest that there would be very little - if any - impact on the overall water levels when it melts.

In terms of global warming, it is the ice that is not floating that is the more material concern - because when/if it does melt, this is the ice that would potentially have the bigger effect on existing sea-levels.

162. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 5:00 am

I think people are right to question “global warming”. I’m not saying that it is not happening, and it is clear that there is a general consensus amongst “scientists” that it is, in fact, occurring. (Not saying they are right…but you can’t merely dismiss a widely-held expert view without good reason).

As to whether or not man is the cause - this is, IMHO, a red herring. If increasing CO2 levels will, in all likelihood (probabilities, not necessarily certainties), bring about a doomsday scenario, then it is in the interests of all of us that we cease contributing to this (insofar as we are able to).

Personally, I don’t find it constructive to merely dismiss outright the conjecture that Global Warming is over-hyped. There are also eminent scientists who remain skeptical about it, for what it is worth.

163. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 8:29 am

kiwiboi: I will definitely look in to an IRC server when I get back to the UK. Also, on your comment 161 you are right - there is no displacement if the ice is already floating - it is the ice on land that matters (and if I recalled correctly - global warming is not effecting that pole).

In addition, I agree completely with comment 162 and I am glad to see more and more people questioning our effect on the environment - it seems to me that anthropological global warming is a fad of the 2000’s which will pass when the press or politicians think of a new fad to make them money.

164. radico - December 24th, 2007 at 8:43 am

Actually porcupines and pineapples would share a common ancestor, but that would have been billions of years ago when the first multicellular organisms arose, after the RNA world.

CO2 concentrations are higher now than they have ever been recorded by tens of ppm’s. CO2 is one of the leading greenhouse gases that causes global warming. Ice ages are cyclical and not preventable with current technology. Global warming is not overhyped, do a little research and stop spewing stupid crap that betrays your ignorance. Humans aren’t the sole cause of global warming, but we are speeding it up alright. Polar ice is melting at an accelerated rate, global temperatures are rising on average; I mean just look at when winter really feels as though it is kicking in. (I live in NYC, and right now you can walk around in a sweater and be warm, no coat, gloves or hat)

Good thing that peek oil production was already reached, with less and less available over the coming decades we will see a push towards more and more research into alternative energy sources, but right now there isn’t really a feasible substitute for hydrocarbon, as it packs so much PE that converts into KE when it burns, much more than any current level of substitute

165. Gump - December 24th, 2007 at 8:46 am

#16 is fairly accurate. Have you ever had an old unopened box of cake mix or flour that has sat around awhile? Take a look at how many bugs you will find inside of it. They didn’t get there after the box was sealed…

166. Gump - December 24th, 2007 at 8:49 am

And as far as Carbon Dioxide goes with global warming, Cows are the #1 producer of CO2 emissions in the world. Maybe we should all just become vegetarians and get rid of the species…On second thought, I kind of like steak.

167. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 9:11 am

Gump: I would rather see the ice caps melt entirely than not be able to eat beef! Power to the cows!

168. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 9:15 am

Gump - I seem to recall that livestock produce significant greenhouse gases in terms of “CO2 equivalent” emissions (nitrous oxide and methane, for example) as opposed to CO2 itself.

Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong…who wants to have expert knowledge of animal emissions

169. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 9:16 am

jfrater - enjoy NZ. I miss the place at Xmas etc.

170. Ed - December 24th, 2007 at 9:18 am

Yesssss!!!! 167th!!!!!

171. Ed - December 24th, 2007 at 9:19 am

Oops…. 170th… damn you people are quick!!!

172. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 9:31 am

Kiwiboi: I am having a really great time here - the weather is amazing (though a bit wet today) and the people are so friendly - I had forgotten how nice we were What country are you in?

173. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 9:36 am

jfrater - I’m in the UK. Originally from Wellington. You ?

174. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 9:39 am

kiwiboi: Wellington too - I went to high school in the Hutt but then moved in to Wellington to live. I now live in London but am hoping to leave there in the next year or two to return home.

175. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 9:40 am

Heh - I’m from Lower Hutt
And now live in London. What part of the Hutt are you from ?

176. Cyn - December 24th, 2007 at 9:59 am

sings…’…its a small world….’

177. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:12 am

cyn: hehe

kiwiboi: Naenae originally - I went to St Bernard’s College

178. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:16 am

jfrater - NO WAY ??!! I’m from Naenae and went to St Bernards

179. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:20 am

okay - that proves it - everyone in NZ knows everyone else! What years were you at SBC?

180. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:22 am

hmmm…1972 to 1977(ish). You don’t have a brother called Andrew, do you ?

181. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:25 am

kiwiboi: I do - he lives in Windsor now - that would be about the years that he went there - my brother Stewart went to SBC too - though he is a few years older than Andrew.

182. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:27 am

jfrater - you do ? These coincidences are eerie ! I have a brother called Andrew who lives in Windsor ???!!

And - wait for it - my name is Stewart !!

WOW !!

183. Brian - December 24th, 2007 at 10:28 am

I knew most of these from elementary school. mainly 2nd grade through 5th grade.

184. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:29 am

erm… and your surname is Frater?

185. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:30 am

jfrater - uncanny !!! IT IS

186. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:31 am

hahahaha you arse

187. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:32 am

LOL !! Merry Xmas little brother. Say “hi” to everybody

188. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 10:34 am

Merry Christmas to you too - say hi to M and the kids - Christmas Card arrived yesterday

189. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 10:34 am

Will do

190. Jon - December 24th, 2007 at 10:56 am

{superfluous}
OH. My. God. Look at that butt.
It’s like, so…
{/superfluous}

191. JWJWBEAN - December 24th, 2007 at 11:22 am

http://www.uky.edu/Ag/Entomolo.....gfood2.htm

This site has a chart for how many bug parts are allowed in some foods per the FDA.

192. JWJWBEAN - December 24th, 2007 at 11:25 am

And this quote

“An Ohio University fact sheet estimates that we eat from one to two pounds of insects each year, and without knowing it.”

came from this site

http://www.sixwise.com/newslet.....r_food.htm

Uggg out of all those facts I am stuck on the whole eating bug one. Gee I haven’t eaten breakfast yet. I wonder how many bugs I can get in with this meal.

193. Cyn - December 24th, 2007 at 12:47 pm

apparently the fraters are quite a funny lot.

194. Lollie - December 24th, 2007 at 1:26 pm

Most of these “facts” have a testable quality…not assumptions built upon assumptions. However, number 14 does not. It is neither scientific or factual.

195. jfrater - December 24th, 2007 at 1:42 pm

Cyn: hilarious

196. kiwiboi - December 24th, 2007 at 1:44 pm

197. joeq - December 25th, 2007 at 5:25 pm

FIRST

198. jewman - December 26th, 2007 at 11:21 am

wow 16 is bullshit.

199. Randall - December 26th, 2007 at 2:49 pm

sdggrant:

Uh, yeah. I *know* there was a “Little Ice Age” (it wasn’t confined to Europe, by the way). I SAID that in my post, pal. Re-read.

200. Randall - December 26th, 2007 at 3:06 pm

Yarr:

I don’t know why I must submit to being called an “asshole” and a “bully” by you or anyone, particularly when I *hardly* insulted YOU at *all* in my post…. but screw it, I’m in the Christmas spirit, and the junior Randall acolytes have me tired out after a day and a half of assembling presents and whatnot.

Now then, Yarr–in point of fact I DID answer your question—such as it was. Unless I missed it, you didn’t actaully ASK a fully-formulated question–you simply said that you read in an Encylopedia from the 50s that the earth would be getting warmer. Right? So what do you expect someone to say? I gave you a full answer to this given the availability of information. So the reason I didn’t say “I don’t know,” pal, is because I DO know—only, you didn’t give me or anyone else much to go on. You can take your sarcasm and stick it—because, come on—you come on to a web forum and SAY you read something in a book from 60 years ago, and then what? You expect an answer? YES, dude–for anyone to respond to you, we’d need more information than you’ve given. And yes, I CAN say you MIGHT be confused–because you might be. How would you know? Maybe you ARE remembering what you read incorrectly. Sheesh. But *I’m* the unreasonable one here. Good lord.

I repeat to you AGAIN (and yeah, this is one of the things I don’t like about people from Texas—they don’t listen)… it is NOT just the “media” who is talking about global warming, Yarr. It’s SCIENCE that is talking about it and BEGAN talking about it when they saw EVIDENCE for it. Yay for you, you’re cynical about the media. So am I, Yarr. Go find your information elsewhere then, if you don’t like hearing it from USA Today or CNN. Cripes.

As for why I hate Texas—I SAID there were a lot of reasons and they weren’t just about Bush. My experience with Texans (going WAY back) is, they’re a bunch of loudmouth, shallow, ignorant rightwing know-nothings. Sure, not all Texans. But let’s just say that it’s my OPINION that the state has far more than its share of such folk.

As for you, I don’t really care if you think I’m an asshole–but I remind you, you’re the one opening yourself up to jibes because you’re coming onto a public forum and offering your doubts about global warming—a phenomenon that the GREAT majority of scientists (who study it) today believe to be real threat. I don’t care if you don’t want to buy it from the media. I don’t get my information on these matters from the clowns on TV, and neither should you. But I do get my info from legit sources–and I’d advise you to do the same and quit complaining about “media hype.”

201. Cyn - December 26th, 2007 at 3:29 pm

“..Texans … they’re a bunch of loudmouth, shallow, ignorant rightwing know-nothings…”

i am neither a loudmouth, shallow, ignorant, damn sure not right wing and i know all kinds of things. and yes, i realize your experience w/ Texans has probably been fairly limited. it may also be much like my experience w/ Christians (who i also ‘paint w/ a broad brush’ as being prudish, hypocritical, backstabbing idiots) that is based on personal and emotionally charged experiences that left me scarred and forever wary of them.

still…just so you know there are many more intelligent, well spoken, well mannered, liberal minded and compassionate Texans than you’d ever imagine from the kinda dumbass antics attributed to Texans you see paraded across the TV screen ..especially from the current ‘psuedo’ Texan resident in the White House.

anywhere you go you’re gonna find assholes. no doubt. and Texas does not have any more than anywhere else. (even it were so, my vote for that ‘over the limit’ number would go to S. Cali..someplace i lived long enough to be left dazed and scarred for life)

but then we are all entitled to our own opinions…biased or not. and hell yes, my opinions are quite biased in favor of Texas, against Christians and wondering why the hell Cali’s not fallen off the continent yet.

have a nice day.

202. Yarr - December 27th, 2007 at 12:08 am

Randall:
I too am in the Christams spirit and just walked the last of the revelers to their cars after 2 and a half days of fun…
I guess maybe you did miss it, so I went back and checked:
Comment 87- I made a statement, asked a question, and then gave a reason for asking.
Comment 97- I asked the question again.
Comment 120- you said nobody knew the answer.
Comment 122- I said that I read somewhere once that there used to be an answer, but *somehow* that changed.
Comment 123- I said that’s why I have doubts…

Then came comment 131 where you more or less gave me the condensed version of Gore’s slide show, insulted my intelligence by insinuating that I couldn’t understand, or was ‘confused’ by something I read, and then went ahead and called me called me illogical and silly. Not to mention, you precluded all that by saying it ‘doesn’t suprise me that you’re from Texas’…

First of all, I can not help being in and/or from Texas. I was born here. My life is here. Maybe my job will transfer me to whatever magical place you live and I won’t be illogical or silly anymore.

Next, science is indeed saying that we’re the cause. It’s also saying that we’re not. It depends on which scientists one happens to be listening. Science is saying a lot of things all the time, but unless it can be translated into an interesting 30-second sound bite, the MEDIA doesn’t care.
Ross fucked Rachel, traffic sucks, Oprah’s on at 4, WE’RE ALL GONNA DIE!!!! Now back to you, Ken…
The government and media have latched on to this one. The scientists that are skeptical don’t get to be on Inside Edition.
Yes, I will keep saying that I am not convinced. If that makes me stupid, confused, illogical or silly, then so be it.

So, from what I can gather from your statements, you are just fine with being told just how and what to MUST do and/or PAY for special light bulbs when the companies that are really causing the damage will just write a check and keep doing what they’re doing.
And while half your paycheck will be going to reduce your ‘footprint’, Al Gore will be that many more times a millionaire and still use more energy in a month than you do in a year. And that’s cool, as long as Yarr in Houston gets off his ’silly’ wagon and joins you to sing anti-warming songs.

As far as you being an asshole- I don’t know you. You might be the coolest, nicest, most fun and funny dude that ever lived.
All I can go on is what you write- which, even though it is very well written and pretty cool most of the time, comes with very little humor and often anger and a whole lot of I’m-better-smarter-do-not-fuck-with-me-I’ll-kill-you ness.

Anyway…