Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous

February 21

Masturbation

How to stop masturbating? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.81.69.219 (talk) 20:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

Get a woman 193.65.112.51 20:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

...even better one that masturbates too. 71.100.171.80 13:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I think this answer is very presumptuous. Please don't assume that anyone who masturbates (or wishes to stop masturbating) would be satisfied with a woman as a substitute. It also presumes that people (or men and lesbians, I guess) in (again, presumably) sexual relationships stop masturbating; an assumption disproven times over by surveys. Anchoress 23:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, why assume that the poster is a heterosexual male or a lesbian? Please tell me you realize that straight women and gay men masturbate as well. --Charlene 08:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Just... Stop? Last I checked masturbation wasn't that terribly addictive although it is pleasant. Joneleth 20:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Could have a problem with wet dreams if you do that though -- feb^talk 23:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Like any pleasurable activity, masturbation can be addicting. --Carnildo 00:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

If it interfers with your daily life, you could get some counseling. If you keep it moderate, and don't bother anyone else, it's no problem in itself. 惑乱 分からん 21:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

You can be a Eunuch person. 202.168.50.40 00:29, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Just get a grip on yourself man, and take yourself in hand!

Exactly, this souldn't be too big for you to handle... 惑乱 分からん 01:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeees. It definitely can be addictive, but only in the same sense that breathing, eating and sleeping are addictive. I'd say more about this, except something's just come up and I've got to go and do something about it.  :) JackofOz 01:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Too much information!!!! --Nevhood 07:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Now that all the bad puns are out of the way, the answer is simple. You don't stop. Pacific Coast Highway ^{{The internet • runs on Rainbows!}} 02:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't mind JackoffOz, he's just yanking your crank. Just tell him to beat it and he'll knock it off. They say that if you really want something, you can get it. People have told me that hypnotism works for things like this. V-Man737 02:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Didn't they used to give bromine to soldiers to eliminate their sex drives and prevent masturbation and possible homosexual activity? --Kurt Shaped Box 02:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I think it was tried. Didn't work.Geni 02:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Myth. Read about it on snopes a while back. -Wooty Woot? contribs 02:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

With a fanfare? meltBanana 02:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

They say that every time you masturbate, you kill a kitten. I don't know if that helps, but whatever. --Nevhood 07:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

This is true! It's in Wikipedia. SubSeven 07:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow. I can't believe it. Well, it is Wikipedia after all! --Nevhood 07:22, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Also: Ceiling Cat is watching you masturbate. Beware. --Kurt Shaped Box 07:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

One of my favorite cat pictures! --Nevhood 21:31, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Masturbation is a serious issue, and not just among people. In one of the early space launches, pre human flight, one monkee restrained in a capsule got a free hand. Apparently ejaculate gummed some of the electronics.

According to this site, Masturbation can kill, or maim you.

Controlling adolescent masturbation is an excuse for female genital mutilation in some cultures.

I've discussed this with my wife, but she said she couldn;'t help me. Something has to happen to stop this getting out of hand! DDB 10:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Well to throw in a piece of 'trivia' for you...the song "Get a Grip" by Semisonic is about this form of self-pleasure. It's from the album All About Chemistry. ny156uk 11:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

List of songs about masturbation. Isn't Wikipedia wonderful? 惑乱 分からん 17:50, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Dave Sim wrote that "sexual desire is a lot like a rash. If you keep 'scratching it' you make it worse... If you learn to leave your penis alone, I discovered, your penis will learn to leave you alone." --Lph 18:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

...except for the messy sheets instead of the messy towel 71.100.171.80 13:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

On the other hand, if it'd turn you into Dave Sim, I doubt it'd be worth it... =S 惑乱 分からん 20:58, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Any kind of activity can be the subject (object?) of a compulsion or obsession (I do not mean OCD). When anything, be it D&D, masturbation, or wikipedia, takes up an inordinate amount of your time and negatively impacts other areas of your life then you are exhibiting addictive or self-destructive behavior. As a Scientologist, I would not, of course, direct you to a "mental health professional" but would first urge you to try some self-therapy and self-discipline. It would help to quit completely and remove anything from your home that is associated with the activity (I mean porn, not napkins). For a while, stay away from things, activities, and areas you know will cause problems for you. Find an alternate activity that takes your mind off the compulsion. If that does not work, then there are twelve-step programs for sexual addiction. If you are religious then talk to your priest, rabbi, mullah, etc. --Justanother 21:25, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, in all seriousness, there is absolutely NOTHING wrong with masturbation. It is a healthy part of your sexuality and you should never been ashamed of it or try to stop yourself from doing it just because you think it's wrong. Some people (me, when I was younger) can experience severe headaches when doing it (it has to do with high blood-pressure, I think), but those are not dangerous and it's fairly rare. That's pretty much the only physical ailment associated with masturbation. Also, virtually every man in the world reguarly masturbates, so not only are you not alone, you are in the VAST majority. You should not quit, that's a very, very bad idea. Some people tell you it's wrong and shameful but it is not. It is completely normal, and completely ok. Of course, everything can be turned into a compulsion, whether it is video games, exercising, playing chess, or whatever. If you feel that you have to do it several times a day, even when you don't want to do it, you might want to talk to a doctor or something. But that's probably not you.

My advice: enjoy the heck out of it! It feels great! Make a point out of making up the most fun fantasies you can (like I don't know, Lindsey Lohan on the top bunk in a submarine crew room. Or why not Paris Hilton in a ski cabin during a snowstorm playing strip poker. Fantasy Hilton can be A LOT of fun, and she's terrible at Texas Hold'em ;) An active sexual life and imagination is a GOOD thing, don't let anyone else tell you different! And remember, those people that tell you different, they are almost certainly doing it too! Oskar 23:20, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't disagree but remember that some people can have a drink with dinner and enjoy a nice movie and some people have a drink with dinner and wake up the next morning in an alley. If it is a problem for him on the order of addictive or compulsive behavior and if he wants to address it then he should address it. That is my only point. He could as well have asked "How do I quit playing WoW" or "How do I quit editing wikipedia". Best of luck to all. --Justanother 00:46, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Also please keep in mind that you may not think it is "wrong or shameful" but some people do. Please don't try to enforce your opinions of morality on other people. Johntex\^talk 16:58, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Considering this person is probably a kid, we shouldn't condemn them for something which is perfectly natural, anymore than we would condemn them for blinking or scratching an itch. -- feb^talk 19:02, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I can't help but notice how many and how detailed, and apparently well-informed responses are on Wikipedia Reference Desks on subjects as intellectually stimulating as wanking, shitting and pissing etc., as compared to the many sparse and parsimonious answers given to some of the genuine and more worthy questions that are posted, including even those that are completely ignored. There must be a correlation in there somewhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.145.241.52 (talk) 20:58, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

Loved this quote. --Taraborn 21:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Promise God you will try to stop: When my mother was dying a couple months I promised God I would try to stop if my mother was spared. When my mother was spared, though I did not stop imediatly I lost the urge, and have not done so in a couple weeks. Such was the case even though throughout college and law school I engaged autoerotic behavior at least once a day.

The problem comes or arises from (no pun intended, chukle, chuckle) becoming envolved in the first place with the person or persons who taught you how to do this. 71.100.171.80 14:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

how did people first learn to do things like this?

February 24

Trans

whats the difference between transsexual and transgenered? they both have articles that dont explain the difference. what about transvestite? the word is used in many articles but does not have an article of its own.

Transvestism does have its own article... 惑乱 分からん 19:25, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It seems (at least from the articles) that a transsexual believes him/herself to be of the opposite sex, while a transgender person may want to be both, or neither. So the first is a subset of the second. Clarityfiend 16:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the pages clearly tell the difference. transvestitism only refers to the wearing of clothes that are attributed to the other gender, transgender has to do with gender identity. here is an example: a man can wear a womans clothes and still behave masculine, he could wear a dress and work on a car for instance, simply wearing woman's clothes would make him a transvestite but not transgenered. In the other case a man could wear pants and a men's shirt or he could wear a dress but if he indentifies himself as feminine or as a woman he would be transgendered. i hope that helps. Amirman 19:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

February 25

Cigar ads

Has the quote "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar" ever been used in advertising? NeonMerlin 02:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't know, but it certainly doesn't make sense to me that that would be the case. The idea is to sell your product as more than "just a cigar," as something different and superior. So I doubt it. 70.108.199.130 08:17, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Precisely: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes it's an (insert brand here)." NeonMerlin 13:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Certainly never by Sigmund Freud. V-Man737 05:23, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Bill Clinton's election slogan?

Sounds like Rene Magritte... But this famous image isn't an advertising image. It's also not a pipe. --Dweller 12:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Changing Daylight Savings Time

…≥—I read in 2005 Congress changed the Daylight Savings Time to begin 3 weeks earlier in March and 1 week later in fall. Seems they think that it will be light longer in the evening to save energy. Its the same day it was in winter,only now its Spring, so i don't get that part, but everyone is freaking out because automatic time change on the VCR, computer, TV, etc. is going to be off!I guess the whole world now is going to fall apart because people will gain or loose this time, and, the millions they will spend to correct everyones time, is a waste. Why not have Congress admit it was a nice idea, but just won't be worth millions to possibly save energy, and let well enough alone. We'll have to see if it does change, and what havoc it has caused. I would just as soon let the rainy Spring come later!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Suzybiggins (talk • contribs) 12:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC).

I apologise, i am brand new at this and my opinion got set without my username. February 25, 2007Suzybiggins 12:43, 25 February 2007 (UTC)suzybiggins

Welcome, but you'll find that it runs against the smooth running of the beast, if you don't actually ask a question here. And we wouldn't want that, would we? --Zeizmic 15:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello Suzy. These pages (the Reference Desk) are for people to ask questions about things, generally wanting a factual answer. They're not supposed to be used to post your opinion, as this is not a chat room or a chat forum. If you want to generally chat about this change, there are many forums out there you could use, or you could befriend someone on Wikipedia and chat on their talkpage. Skittle 16:50, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I would not only eliminate Daylight Savings Time, but time zones, as well, and have everybody use UTC. Everyone would just set different times, based on when the Sun is up in their area, to go to work and school. (It really is the same time everywhere, we just pretend it isn't because the Sun is in a different relative position.) This would make it far easier for people around the world to communicate about time than it is now. This would also make it the same day everywhere. StuRat 13:35, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

It really is the same time everywhere?? If so, what time would that be? UTC? Hardly. That's just as much of an arbitrary yardstick as anything else. In other than polar latitudes, local time usually has a strong relationship with sunrise and sunset, and for good reasons. Can you imagine what your idea would mean for some people: "I wake up at 4pm (Monday) when the sun has been up for an hour. I start my working day at 6pm, and leave the office at 2am (Tuesday), when the sun is just starting to set". For all sorts of practical reasons, this is not really a goer, Stu. JackofOz 23:24, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

According to science there have been a precise number of seconds since the Big Bang. We don't know exactly what that number of seconds is, but it's somewhere around 15 billion years. For those who believe in mythology instead of science, nearly every religion also has a starting point for the universe, making it the same number of seconds since creation in Perth and Toronto. So, whether you believe in science or superstition, it's still the same time everywhere. StuRat 16:37, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

• There really is a question here. Actually there are two: "Will starting Daylight Savings Time earlier really save energy? and "Is it worth the bother people will have to go through?" The answer is yes and yes.

Let's say the sun is rising where you live at 6:20am and setting at 5:30pm. You are getting up at 5:30 to get ready for work. You have to turn on a lot of lights because it is still dark. You get home about 5:00 or 5:30 and again have to turn on a bunch of lights until you got to bet at 9:30.

If we switch to Daylight Savings Time today, the sun would suddenly be rising at 7:20 and setting at 6:30. You still need lights in the morning, but you need them for one less hour in the evening. That saves energy becuase most households consume more energy at night. The United States saves about 1% of its energy used as a result of observing DST. See Daylight Savings Time.

Is it worth the bother? Yes. Saving just one-percent of the energy used in the United States for a 3-week period is a big deal. Most people have their leasure time at the end of the day rather than the morning. For that reason, a lot of people would rather we be on DST all year long so that they can have more light in the evenings.

Also, it is not that hard to set your clocks ahead sooner in the year. You have to do it anyway, what date you do it does not make much difference. The hoopla this year is that a lot of software programs were written prior to Congress' decision, so they don't know the switch is coming early. You probably only have between 0 and 3 devices in your house that are even smart enough to try to reset themselves. You just need to check on them.

The only people who are even remotely likely to suffer because of this are people who make international conference calls at a set time. Because the rest of the world is not switching early, these people may be confused about what time to dial into their conference call. Johntex\^talk 03:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The downside is that you may have to get up in the dark for a month longer than you otherwise would. For some of us it is extremely difficult to wake up when it is dark outside; we function much better if it's light for a little while before we have to get out of bed.

By the way, obviously full-time daylight saving time would eventually be the same as full-time standard time, because schools and businesses would eventually adjust their starting times accordingly, and eventually you'd reach the same equilibrium position you have now, relative to the Sun as if you changed it to standard time all the time. --Trovatore 03:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

For the problem of getting up in the dark, have you thought about putting a timer on your lights? They make alarm clocks that gradually turn the lights on to help you wake up. Concerning your hypothesis that schools and business would just adjust their starting times - I doubt that would happen. Starting times are culturally ingrained, I doubt they would change, especially since everyone would know the reason the time shifted. Johntex\^talk 05:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Inside lights are the wrong intensity, the wrong color temperature, and come from the wrong direction. No doubt with sufficient expense these things could be overcome, but personally I don't want to get up in the dark, period, and I think plenty of people agree with me. The insufferable arrogance of the morning people will not last forever.

I think you're quite wrong about what would happen with starting times. It would take a while, but the efficient markets hypothesis would eventually prove correct, and the equilibrium would shift to put activity relative to daylight the way people actually want. --Trovatore 07:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I just don't get it. If there are only 10 hours of light in a day, and 14 hours of darkness, and you sleep for 8 hours during those 14 hours of darkness, that will mean 6 hours of using lights, whether at home, in the car, or at work, no matter what the clock on the wall says. Arguments to the contrary sound as weak as General Motors' absurd decision to spell "employee" as "employe", to save time and money used to print that extra "e". This was idiotic, of course. There are so many unknown factors, like seasonal affective disorder, increased or decreased car accidents due to dusk, Sun in people's eyes, etc., that a comprehensive analysis of the effects beforehand is impossible. StuRat 14:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If Daylight Savings didn't save energy, having trialed it for decades in many countries (and many governments have experimented with different clock movements), this would be apparent and people wouldn't do it any more. Since governments and businesses continue to endorse the idea, one can conclude that it does save energy. Therefore, since reality does not match your theory, your theory must be incorrect :-) Skittle 17:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Based on that logic, if the war on drugs was a dismal failure for decades, it would be discontinued, would it not ? I'm not sure if it's possible to measure the effects of daylight savings time, as many other factors change at the same time (like a harsher than normal winter, for example). And businesses want to sell more electricity, gasoline, and other products, not less, so they hardly can be expected to work for conservation. US government, at least since Reagan, has largely been in the pockets of businessmen and their lobbyists. StuRat 19:47, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Time Cube. sorry i had to. Amirman 19:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

February 26

Pain

What is the worst purely physical pain? --froth^T 21:33, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

kicking someone in the balls forever and ever and ever

I don't find kicking someone in the balls to be painful at all, provided you wear the proper shoes, of course. :-) StuRat 22:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I heard giving birth would be the most painful... 惑乱 分からん 00:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'd imagine that there would be plenty of things worse than giving birth.. slowly getting your hands cut off at the wrists with a rusty sawblade for one. But I hear that there are some pains that for special reasons are in a class all their own, like cracking a femur down the length of the bone --froth^T 00:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

The three most common answers for "what is the most painful thing" are childbirth, passing a gallstone, and passing a kidney stone. --Carnildo 01:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Probably said half-seriously ("aw man that was the most painful thing EVER") but there is no way that those are the most painful things. What if instead of a baby coming out, a woman was forced to endure someone breaking her cervix and a wooden baby coated in sandpaper being pushed into her uterus? I'm looking for a more scientific answer to the question, like is there some disease which directly stimulates all pain nerves in the body or something insane like that? --froth^T 02:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I don't think a human body could handle extreme amounts of pain. I think anything severely more painful than the answers given, would likely cause you to either pass out or die in the process... 惑乱 分からん 02:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Comparing kidney stones to childbirth? Come on, babies aren't jagged when they come out! − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 16:21, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I quite agree with Wakuran. Although I would have to say crucifixion would be the worst. By the way, the word "excruciating" literally meant "off of the cross," reflecting the intense, slow death of the victim. bibliomaniac15 04:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Info given here is purely for discussion and does not constitute a recommendation, and we accept no liability. I expect electric shock would be the worst, per [1]. The pain reportedly increases as the eighth power of the current. The shock can be remotely applied via a shock belt. Sadly, reports are that extreme pain causes neither death nor passing out, if properly done. It can be applied to sensative areas while avoiding passage through the heart (which might cause death) or the brain(which might cause unconsciousness or death). Most aversive conditioning or torture uses low current high voltage application, (nonlethal agricultural electric fence, Tucker telephone , dog shock collar, Taser, cattle prod, Bird Inductorium, rat maze, aversive conditioning) while the Electric chair uses high voltage high current. Edison 06:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

torture and pain are painstakingly crucial in this tortuous subject. V-Man737 07:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

You're all wrong. The is little discussion in the academic community about what the most painful sensation of all is: Deuce Bigalow: European Gigolo. Causes death in about 93% of reported cases and the few survivors are so badly scarred that they are unable to stop screaming in horror for the rest of their natural lives. Oskar 06:56, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Pain is actually a very relative measure and varies between people. The brain can block any nerve in the body and there is a thresh hold of pain that a human can experience. According to this [2] with training it is possible to learn to consciously control pain. Also, as a side note, our article Agony says that cancer sometimes causes extreme pain. S.dedalus 07:39, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, it would vary widely from person to person. For example, a family friend reported using an epillator on her legs as being unbearably painful, more painful than childbirth! My mother regularly uses an epillator with little to no discomfort, and considers childbirth as the most painful thing she has ever experienced, but has never broken a bone or donated bone marrow, which could be worse. My sister broke her arm, and seemed to feel little pain compared to the bruising on her back (although that could be a self-preservation, endorphin-related thing I suppose). So really, people feel different things as being more or less painful. Skittle 16:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Pain is subjective, nociception is objective. If you wish to be scientific about it, you would measure the most noxious nociceptive response based on quantitative physiological parameters. Comparing childbirth to a kick in the nuts is pointless, as no one person can experience both. Rockpocket 21:40, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

How about dislocating your entire knee? [3] The pain in that instant would be very intense though I imagine it would die down quickly. Sabar 10:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Water in stone

Okay, stupid question. I thought I heard/watched on TV/read that water could be extracted from stones, but I doubt it's possible. Does anyone know the answer to this less than usual question? · AO ^Talk 21:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

perhaps you are thinking of the survival skills, solar still or condensation traps. Or maybe you are refering to underground aquifers? Theoretically you could make water out of anything that has hydrogen and oxygen atoms given enough energy. Water Vapor is a product of combustion reactions. -- Diletante 22:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised at all if even stones (at least those found on Earth) contain miniscule trace amounts of moisture. If so, then technically, if you're willing to consider the extraction of one billionth of one exalitre (0.000000000000000000000000000001 litres) of water evidence that water can be extracted from stones, then I suppose the answer would be yes. Loomis 23:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

There are water-permeable rocks, like sandstone, which can store more substantial quantities of water. StuRat 23:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

There's a far higher proportion of gold in seawater than there is of water in rocks, so that would be a better proposition. But even that is economically pointless, since it would cost far more to extract the gold than the gold is worth. JackofOz 23:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

As a Boy Scout I was told not to place creek rocks around a campfire because the water in them would make them explode from the heat. Sounds like a job for [Mythbusters]]. Edison 06:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

It would take very little water to produce enough steam to blow a chunk off a rock, so that sounds possible to me. StuRat 12:51, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! So basically, no, it isn't possible to extract water from rock (in substantial quantities). As for exploding rocks... I'll try that sometime. :-) · AO ^Talk 14:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

HAH! As a young Boy Scout, I'd put all sorts of rocks into the fire to try to get them to explode. One time I got the rock hot enough that when I took it out of the fire (using tongs, of course), it cracked (but did not explode). Lucky for me, I never happened to throw a geode in a fire. V-Man737 04:29, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Exploding rocks may be rare, but that's still good enough reason not to risk it. StuRat 14:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

A potato baking in the coals exploded once on a camping trip The outside looked like a rock, but a piece of the superheated interior hit someone on the forehead and stuck there for a bit, causing a nice 2nd degree burn. Edison 16:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Lost in Space ?

I seem to recall an episode of Lost in Space where Zachary Smith squeezed sponges made to resemble rocks and got water out of them, to convince some alien he had superhuman strength. Am I remembering correctly ? StuRat 15:07, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Squeezing water from a stone is a very old literary device to show great strength (no, I have no sources, just memories of old folk tales), sometimes being set as a challenge to win a great prize. Usually I've heard the trick being using fruit instead of stones; I imagine sponges are a modern take on it! Anyway, this was just to suggest what might have been misheard, out of context. Hope I haven't patronised anyone! Oh, and there's the common phrases "It's like squeezing blood (or water) from a stone", "You won't get water (or blood) from a stone no matter how hard you squeeze", etc which again could have been heard out of context. Skittle 16:37, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Moses did it. From memory, he did it twice. But once he wasn't supposed to hit the rock. --Dweller 17:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure that used cheese sometimes, instead of fruit. And river can come out of rock too, even without magic

I remember being told a story in primary school about a knight or something who defeated a dragon by telling him he could squeeze water out of a rock, the dragon tried and couldnt do it, and the knight used cheese instead and this scared the dragon into thinking the knight was stronger and so the dragon gave up it's treasure. My memory says it was St. George, but it seems he just stabbed the thing to death. No idea where it's from, then. Anyone remember? I'd like to know. Capubadger 10:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was told that fairytale as a kid too. I think the knight blackened the cheese in a fire to make it look like a rock... --Kurt Shaped Box 10:12, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Was it perhaps the "Vikings in Space" episode of "Lost in Space" ? I can't find a full summary anywhere, just a brief synopsis which mentions Smith using "trickery" to fool the Vikings, which I think was the water from rocks bit. StuRat 16:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i think it was also in some versions of the story of the taylor who was sent to deal with a giant

February 27

Contribution

I love this website and I found something that you guys don't have. I don't want to sign up or anything but heres the website that I found that has different martial art syles that different practitioners use. Look under "Bruce Kinney - Instructer." Theres a fighting style and translation. It's Lohan Kuen(Monk's Fist). You don't have a page about it, so I wanted to let you know. I just want to contribute to this wonderful website!

http://www.nationalkungfu.com/forms.html

UK road signs

A question about the road signs in the UK. What does an Access only sign on the entrance to a road mean? no offense, but if you don't know the answer to the question, please don't quess! I have checked the WP article and the Highway code website. MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 18:54, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

It usually means that you can only use the road if you require access to the premises on that road.--88.111.98.95 18:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes; it means, well, access only. In other words, it is not a through road, but only to be used if you are visiting a particular house or location. Clio the Muse 19:08, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

does it mean that only residents can park there?MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 20:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

No, it does not; visitors can park also, unless specific restrictions are in operation. Clio the Muse 20:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

In the U.S., we would use "NO THRU TRAFFIC" for this sign. I would have had no idea what "access only" means. -- Mwalcoff 01:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

And I would have been puzzled by the US sign, trying to work out what THRU stands for and assuming it didn't apply to me.... Ah, convention. Skittle 15:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There must be a rule that everything having to do with cars or driving has to be different in British and American English. I understand that when British people see American signs that say "DO NOT PASS," they think it means they can't drive past the sign! -- Mwalcoff 00:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

What does this mean? Do not overtake, I assume? Clio the Muse 00:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that would be the British equivalent. -- Mwalcoff 00:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Read it as "local access only". --Anon, Feb. 28, 2007, 05:28 (UTC).

In some instances, a temporary "Access only" sign will be put up on a road which is normally a through route, during periods of roadworks. In such cases, it means that the road is temporarily shut to through traffic, but residents/visitors can still access the buildings on the street up to the point of the blockage. This has been going on in my village rather a lot lately... Hassocks5489 09:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Widescreen monitors.

If a 4:3 monitor and a 16:9 monitor are both 19", does that mean the 16:9 one will be shorter than the 4:3 one, meaning the 4:3 is better for 4:3 images? Or is the 16:9 19" monitor just a 19" 4:3 monitor with extra space on the sides?

I read that the inch number was measured by a diagonal line from the upper left corner of the screen to the lower right, so your first defiition seems more likely. 惑乱 分からん 23:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah - monitors are measured by the diagonal - so yes - the 16:9 monitor will be shorter but wider than the 4:3 if they have the same diagonal - so displaying an un-cropped 4:3 image on the wide-screen monitor will result in a smaller image than on the 4:3 monitor. SteveBaker 23:29, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If you are selecting between two monitors, pick the widescreen one (btw, widescreen monitors are often 16:10, not 16:9, for some reason). It's such a huge improvement over 4:3 monitors, whether you are watching movies or just using your computer. Well, in my (very credible :D) opinon at least Oskar 02:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Just did some math, because I was bored. Assuming that 19" refers to the diagonal of the "visible area". With 3:4 you're getting 173.3 square inches of monitor for your money, 10:16 comes in at 162.257 sq inches and 9:16 is 154.256 sq inches. So 3:4 is a better deal for amount of screen, but obviously they will sell for different prices anyways. I do believe that widescreen formats look much better for movies and gaming, but i prefer 3:4 for browsing webpages and the like. Capubadger 10:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The problem with wide-screen for reading text is that our eyes don't do well at reading very long lines of text because when you get to the end of one line and have to zip back to the start of the next, you tend to lose track of which line is which. This is why newspapers split the page up to use narrow columns. So you'll tend to use tall-but-narrow windows that are closer to the shape of a 4:3 screen than to a 16:9. However, if you want to have a lot of text windows open at the same time - then 16:9 lets you put more windows side-by-side. So which you want depends a lot on what you do most. Of course if you plan to watch movies on your monitor - then 16:9 is *THE* way to go. Most action-oriented 3D games look best in 16:9 too. If you plan to use your PC to write a novel (or an encyclopedia!) then 4:3 is probably the best choice. SteveBaker 15:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

February 28

Serena Williams

Hi, I have seen several news article about Serena Williams being possibly transgendered or taking steroids. Her article completely doesn't say anything. I think asked on the talk page and found it is filled with fanboys who vandalize the talk page whenever I ask -- and clearly these fanboys also (WP:OWN) control the article, too.

Anyhow, before coming here I google searched and just found nothing. Here is an interview where someone asked her and she refused to answer it http://www.bongonews.com/layout1.php?event=181

Does Serena Williams take steroids or is transgendered? SakotGrimshine 00:31, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

After a bit of a search, I could find no evidence that Serena Williams is transgendered or that she has been accused of using steroids. As for your "interview", it is clearly bogus and not to be taken seriously. If you look under the banner of "Bongo News" you will see that that website is really about "Satire. Parody. Jokes". Marco polo 01:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Have you found anything refuting any claims? Many people think she is on steroids and it would be good to have a denial in some form if is not true. SakotGrimshine 01:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Transgender refers to a psychological preference. I believe you mean transsexual. Anyway, just because she doesn't look like Anna Kournikova doesn't mean she has to waste her time denying rumors. The burden of proof is on the other side. Clarityfiend 02:13, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) That's not how it works. You need to find evidence supporting the claim, not denying it. I haven't found any refutation of any sort to her being a robot, but that doesn't mean that she is. If you can find no credible claims for something, it is completely irrelevant whether or not there exists a refutation. See negative proof Oskar 02:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Come on, with an ass like that, how could she be transsexual? Although with arms like this, I wouldn't find it hard to believe she's on the 'roids. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh, I remember that Robert Crumb drew a picture based on that ass picture. It's in his mag "Art and Beauty Magazine Vol. 2", I think. I couldn't find any example online, though... 惑乱 分からん 11:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

So what I've learned so far is people suspect steroids, but nobody really knows and there's no published proof? SakotGrimshine 17:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

And if they do prove it she (or possibly he) might be banned from the sport

It's extremely unlikey she was a he; they would have had to alter records all the way back to her birth. As for steroids, tennis actually seems to have a good testing procedure; Sesil Karatantcheva and Karol Beck have been caught and banned in recent years, and a top level player like Serena would be tested often. Clarityfiend 21:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

calories

which food is high in calories and fat but its healthy for you?it sumthin common

All food - broccoli, butter, bread, beef - is "healthy" in general*. It's all in the amount. One teaspoon of oil won't kill you and may contain omega-3 oils that can be beneficial. A cup of oil a day isn't a good thing - although it'll probably kill you with diarrhea before it makes you fat. (*I say "in general" because of course contaminated food isn't healthy, nor is anything the diner is personally allergic to.) --Charlene 09:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

There are things which should be avoided entirely (where possible), like trans fats. One high fat food that's good for you is avocado, another is fish, like salmon. Full fat milk is good for kids, but low fat milk is probably better for adults. Some nuts, like walnuts, are also quite healthy and quite high in fat. Anything with a substantial amount of fat is also likely to be somewhat high in calories, as fat has 7 9 calories per gram. StuRat 13:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)::

I know the question doesn't mention this, but please, when looking at fats and calories, don't forget fibre. If you don't eat sufficient fibre, you can look forward in later life to such problems as Diverticulitis and the possible surgical removal of some part of your bowel. Hey - I just realised, that's a great way to lose weight instantly.

So is cutting your legs off

I recommend childbirth for quick weight loss. StuRat 16:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Although the prereqiosote is a slow weight gain. Cutting your legs off would likely be more efficient... 惑乱 分からん 17:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Slight correction- fat has 9 calories per gram, not 7. Carbs and protein have 4. As pointed out above there's nothing unhealthy about eating fat- it's necessary. People don't understand nutrition very well, so things get oversimplified into "fat is bad", which is inaccurate. Too much is bad, sure, just like nearly anything. Friday (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the slight correction. There are also good fats (from vegetables, nuts, grains, and fish), bad fats (from meat and fowl), and horrible fats (trans-fats from a chemist's lab). You want to maximize the good fats, limit the bad fats, and completely eliminate the horrible trans-fats, wherever possible. StuRat 23:53, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Avocados, perchance? They have a high amount of fat for a fruit, but I'm not sure about calories. bibliomaniac15 03:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I wish I'd thought of that. :-) StuRat 12:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

i need help

i am looking for examples of companies that were previously in operation but were closed down for management problems and which were revived and are now back in operation. I would prefer companies in the USA or any other region. Thank you 41.222.13.12 09:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

boo.com was one of the most high profile failures of the dot-com bubble. I understand they are relaunching soon, at least according to (www.boo.com). Apple computers had a hugely poor period and then revived strongly, they didn't close down but they had major problems. The mini brand was kept by BMW as part of a deal with Rover upon purchasing them. You could consider that brand to be recovered from a management problem as it is claimed rover badly managed many valuable 'brands', it is interest to see just how many reputable brands BMW gained control of when helping Rover out. ny156uk 17:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

lsd

I recently met a guy who had done to much LSD in the past. He never really finished the trip and still lives in a very strange version of reality. Is there a name for this disorder? Will he ever be the same again?

Apparently Hallucinogen persisting perception disorder. 惑乱 分からん 13:20, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Much appreciated, and is similar to what i am looking for. However, this article seem so be very vison related whereas this chaps vision is fine, and he thinks he is fine and normal. Its just when you talk to him you soon realise that his entire world perception is wrong, eg he has in depth discusions with his couch. I believe Syd Barrett from Pink Floyd suffered from a similar disorder.

Read Psychosis. Drug taking can bring this on, and according to my doctor, there is little chance of recovery. --Zeizmic 15:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Reading upside down?

Is there a recognised term for being able to read upside down text - I find it fairly easy whereas other people seem to struggle - I'm just curious if it's recognised. Capubadger 15:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

You might want to consult Dr. Seuss' I Can Read With My Eyes Shut... bibliomaniac15 03:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Learning to read upside down was traditionally common among Yemenite Jews, at a time when many students had to share the few religious texts.--Pharos 15:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

how can carlos coys fans wrie to him

Im one of spm biggest fans hearing his songs 14 hours a day even at work i dont care what he did i dont even think he did it but it would be a big honor for me to write to him ."how can this happen"

You may be able to get in touch with Carlos Coy through the record label, Dope House Records (website). --h2g2bob 19:06, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

221,000 kwh...?

Did Al Gore spend $30,000 on utilities at his Nashville estate last year including 221,000 kwh of electricity to grow pot in his basement?. 71.100.171.80 16:58, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Well if you've heard it on the interent then it's probably true, or not--VectorPotential^Talk 17:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Al Gore's main source of income is his reputation. It is absurd to the point of being inconceivable that he would risk that reputation to produce illegal drugs. His enemies, however, would have an interest in eroding his reputation through false rumors. Marco polo 17:34, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This meme seems to have started on the 26th with this article on a policy advocacy group's website. I don't know when the marijuana story was tacked on. I suggest you watch the snopes page on this, as they research thes kinds of claims. -- Diletante 18:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

see Al Gore controversies#Use of energy in homeJon513 18:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The source of the charges supports my hypothesis that this is the work of Gore's enemies. The policies advocated by the "policy advocacy group" on whose website the charges appeared happen to be those of the Republican Party, policies that Gore has attacked. Marco polo 18:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the pot question arose in an attempt to comprehhend Al's 180 degree turn on Pigeon River and his proclaimed sincerity for an anti-global warming stand which he could do a 180 on as well. 71.100.171.80 06:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Union

What union or group would a high school history teacher belong to? Thanks, 209.81.119.178 17:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC).

• The Teacher's Union, odd that there's an entire category of teacher's unions, yet there exists no generalized article on teacher's unions--VectorPotential^Talk 18:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Which country do you have in mind? In England it would be the National Union of Teachers, though I should add that this is not exclusive to history teachers. Clio the Muse 18:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

In the United States, the two dominant teachers' unions are the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA). Marco polo 20:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

In the UK, there's also the National Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women Teachers. Our articles say they both have about as many members - over 250k, and 265k. --Tagishsimon (talk)

Internet Video Meme

There was an video circulating on the internet of some strange European dude who vaguely resembles Borat trying to be sing/rap, be cool, and I believe he also used some sort of sound mixer in his videos. (Very strange but hilarious.) I think the videos were from the 80's, and it's been a couple years. Can't remember much about it, I've tried to look up 'Net memes but I can't seem to get any results. I'm betting some of you might remember. --Doctorcherokee 20:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Are you sure it wasn't one of Sacha Baron Cohen's other acts? Like Ali G, perhaps? --Cody.Pope 20:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Definitely wasn't. This was a weird music video of some sort from likely from the 80's. This dude also grimaced as he was mixing his music in the video. Very weird, crazy, and funny. --Doctorcherokee 20:50, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I believe you may be thinking of Mahir Çağrı. Cyraan 21:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Foggy days in London England.

Every time I see newscasts of London its raining or foggy.Just how many days is there sunshine ?

London has a relatively cloudy climate, with frequent light rain. Fog is not unusual. However, sunshine is not unusual either, particularly in the summer months, as this graph shows. The pattern in London, as in other parts of northwestern Europe, is that there are some hours of sunshine, or even scattered minutes of sunshine, between which there are intervals of clouds, fog, and/or usually light rain that last hours or occasionally days. What is not so common in northwestern Europe, exposed as it is to moisture from the North Atlantic, are stretches of several days on end of completely clear skies, which are typical of the interiors (and to a lesser degree the east coasts) of continents in the temperate latitudes. Marco polo 22:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there are some fairly obdurate myths about the London climate. Many Americans I meet on my travels seem to have a somewhat Victorian perspective on the matter, with images of Jack the Ripper and Sherlock Holmes slipping in and out of impenetrable fog! Fog, believe it or not-and despite what happened last December-is now a fairly rare event, worthy of news in itself. There is rain, but not as much as there used to be, and last summer there was a fairly serious drought, with hose pipe bans and the like. We also had plenty of sunshine last summer-and the summer before-, and the winter has been very mild. In fact, on a recent trip to Mexico City for the first few days I found it colder there than in London! Clio the Muse 23:41, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

In the past, London was the victim of insanely dense fog...Smog actually...because homes were heated with open coal fires. That, combined with the high humidity caused the nightmareish "Pea soupers" that you see in all of the best Holmes movies. But clean air legislation ("Smoke free zones") passed in the 1950's pretty much fixed that up so that you really don't see that much fog in London anymore. Whilst it certainly does rain a lot - it's mostly very light rain. The annual rainfall in London is 22" - compared to (say) Dallas, Texas (where I happen to live right now) which gets 37". The difference is that here in Texas, it'll often rain 4 to 6 inches in a single hour - last year we got 11" of rain in a single night. So here in Texas we have very few rainy days. London gets its rain in tiny amounts - but spread out over an awful lot of days. SteveBaker 00:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I can't see my screen, so forgive me for any typos. Seriously, what you're probably seeing is the phenomenon of "library pictures". There's a story about London? OK, let's illustrate it with, erm, let me see, red buses, beefeaters, Tower Bridge, Buckingham Palace, and... fog. You're seeing a director's idea of what London should be like. We get fog here... it often brings our public transport system to a grinding halt (if it was moving in the first place) but it's not an especially common problem. --Dweller 12:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Here is a random sample of London weather. We have had several wet days in London this week - in fact, I think there has been at least some rain on each day since last weekend - but today is dry and sunny, although a bit colder than the last few days. This week's weather is fairly typical for this time of year. Fog in central London is a rare event - I would say one or two days a year at most, usually in the morning and gone by lunch time. Gandalf61 12:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Could the weather, and especially the change in weather have been caused partly by there being a lot more very tall buildings in london now

sex help

I'm a little embarrased to ask this but I think me and my girlfriend( who by the way is really hot) are about to get to to 3rd or pollibly 4th base and I have no idea what to do. can any body give me any pointers

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Finchut.2011 (talk • contribs) 22:04, 28 February 2007

uh.......have fun

If you are serious, you might take a look at Sexual intercourse. I'm not quite sure what 3rd or 4th base are, but assuming you do, you should have some idea what to do. If you want to see this girlfriend again, you might want to focus on giving her pleasure. A key to this is foreplay. Marco polo 22:47, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If everything else fails, use cloroform and say she passed out from sexual exchaustion. Joneleth 23:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

One other important thought: If you don't want her to get pregnant and don't want to catch any sexually transmitted diseases she just might be carrying, be sure to have a condom so that you can use it if you actually do have intercourse. Marco polo 23:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Heh, if this is serious, can't think of a better place to ask that question ;), I shall try to answer as maturely as I can. Like Marco said, USE A CONDOM, as well as the fact that foreplay is important (the article is rather informative). Most of the time, they aren't ready to just jump right into intercourse, you have to work your way there, if you want to use your finger, definitely make sure your nails are clipped. Try to focus on her wants as your own, if you aren't sure, don't be afraid to ask her what she wants you to do, assuming she wants you to be gentle as opposed to rough (unless thats what she asks for).

If you make it to intercourse (FYI, its usually referred to as home, or a home run, not 4'th base), and if this is your first time, you will probably climax rather quickly, its unavoidable. If this happens, try not to be embarrassed, be honest, and if she has not climaxed yet, ask her if she would like you continue using other means such as oral stimulation, or stimulation with your hand or fingers until your refractory period has ended. If this is her first time, it may be painful for her, and there may be a small amount of bleeding, causing her to not want to continue further. Above all, communicate, if she knows you are in it for her as much as yourself, she will be more willing to do it again down the line. If there are specific questions that may be a bit less family-friendly, or ones with answers as such, you are welcome to leave them at my talk page here. Cyraan 23:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

If this is a serious request, there must be better websites than Wikipedia available. Aren't there a lot of sex education sites aimed at teens, with responses from professionals, etc? Anyway, from the top of my head, condom and communication. Don't be nervous for a failure, you get other chances later. Remember that it's a big step for her, try to be aware of any feelings she has about it, if she'd decide to change her mind because she's nervous, etc. Don't worry if the erection fails because you're nervous, or other mistakes, you'd get other chances later. 惑乱 分からん 00:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

And wait until you find out about fifth base. (What! No article? It's the cabal!) V-Man737 02:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

A service at Columbia University called "Go Ask Alice" [4] has answers to common (and uncommon) questions about sexuality and other health issues, which have been prepared by medical professionals. See [5] for instance. Wikipedeia is not a reliable source for answers to medical questions such as prevention of pregnancy or the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, and emotional health of persons in relationships. Note that condoms commonly break, especially if they have been carried around in the wallet for a long while in hopes of getting lucky. Edison 16:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

March 1

the value of my baseball cards

im not sure where to go in order to find the value of a set of 1994 mint condition topps series 1 and 2 trading cards for baseball. cant anyone help me out?

Presuming you live in the United States, your local library will probably carry a price guide. However, this seems to suggest a retail of $44.99, and this suggests $49.99. Carom 01:52, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Back in my baseball card collecting days, Beckett's Baseball Card Monthly was the magazine to get price information from. Assuming you live in the U.S., most any baseball card shop should carry a copy or at the very least, have one behind the counter that the owner would be willing to have you leaf through. Dismas|^(talk) 16:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Bees disappearing

What the fucking hell is going on ? I've heard on the news TODAY that these things are disappearing. Can you say MASS STARVATION and/or WAR over FOOD ?! Need a template on the Bees article. Something is killing them, maybe it is Foul Brood, a disease that if it got into one hive, the rest of the hives have to be destroyed to stop this shit. 205.240.146.224 02:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ehh, source? 惑乱 分からん 02:36, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I hear the problem is caused by people who are overly worried about bees. V-Man737 02:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't know what the original questioner was looking at, but here's a recent news story from the NY Times about disappearing bees: Honey Bees Vanish, Leaving Keepers In Peril. Crypticfirefly 03:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

With the bees gone, this could mean WAR over food. Agree ? Disagree ?205.240.146.224 06:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps among those people who depend on bees as their main source of food (but honestly, I haven't really met anyone who eats bees). Other than that (and, more seriously, even considering the absence of honey), if bees really are disappearing, I really don't see a direct consequence on the world's food supply. If you are concerned about the ecosystem that the bees are in, and how it relates to the world's food supply, I could conceivably see a vague connection, but still not an immediately direct one (or, at least, one that is not esaily overcome by simple solutions). V-Man737 06:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

From the Bee article: "It is estimated that one third of the human food supply depends on insect pollination, most of this accomplished by bees.". I believe that this is what all the hub-bub is about... Discuss? Capubadger 08:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

If all honey-bees become extinct (which seems highly unlikely to me), we would need to move to alternate pollinators, like other species of bees, other insects, and hummingbirds. Also, we might need to replant some fields with crops which don't require pollination. However, I suspect that the bees, feeling a strong evolutionary pressure, will quickly mutate to develop a resistance to whatever is killing them. If 99% of the queens are susceptible and die off, that will leave the 1% which have a resistance, which will quickly rebuild the population with resistant bees and queens to form new colonies. StuRat 11:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Pollinator decline talks about these issues. Looks like it is related to an environmental ELE if you follow a few links.. Sandman30s 13:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need the third word in the question?--88.111.98.95 15:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Flash Video Query

Does anybody know what has become of a flash video that begins with Neville Chamberlain's declaration of war with Germany in '39 and ends with the movement of Great Britain to Mars? It was on Albino Blacksheep years ago but seems to have disappeared. Mach Seventy 05:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

copied to Entertainment V-Man737 06:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Beauty consciousness

I think I am very conscious about my looks.I get easily disturbed when anyone says anything relating to my looks.I am very embarassed abut it since it makes me feel very girlish and even have been subject to others ridicule.

This is a common problem. What was your actual question? JackofOz 08:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Please don't worry about this. I'm guessing that you are in your early teens? Well, you may find this hard to believe, but other people are just as sensitive and vulnerable as you. Some are simply better at hiding it than others. In time you will come to live with yourself as you are. Many, many people have been down this same road. Clio the Muse 10:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

True beauty is one the inside ;) --IvanKnight69 12:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I read somewhere that in the development of people from child to adolescent to adult etc - they begin most self-conscious of their face and head, and next this self-consciousness moves to the upper body, and then later to the stomach, then to the waste, and lower and lower as we get older. I don't believe this is a hard and fast rule, but could be part of behavioural psychology. In other words, over the years if you remain extremely self conscious, in theory you will eventually move on to being more or equally conscious of other areas of your body -- such as your muscular build or your levels of fat or your height or something else.

You didn't ask a question however.

I believe the reason you are so self-conscious is because you think you need to be. You may feel that unless you check your hair all the time or unless you spend 30 minutes doing your hair every day that you won't look good. This on some level may be true, but being young you aren't very aware about how the world sees you -- your self-consciousness might even make you look over-neat to others, or stuck up to others. You may end up applying too much make-up, or having over-perfect hair. So some solutions include learning to like yourself, finding ways to relax about your looks a bit more -- maybe you need to find a new hairdresser that can give you a look that you'll feel more comfortable with -- or buy clothes/shoes that suit you better and make you feel more comfortable with yourself -- or earings or whatever. It may also help to get feedback from people you can trust - like a parent or older friend.

Finally, over time as you get older and you learn about the world and how shallow young people can be, you will begin to relax a little about your looks. As you get older you might find someone that likes you or approves of you no matter how you look - or you will just be more conscious about other things like work, money, gaining weight, sports, etc.
Good luck.
Rfwoolf 16:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Phone Question

I currently have a cingular pick your plan phone. if i wanted to get a better phone could i just go to a cingular store and get the smartchip transfered to a new one.--logger 08:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Go to a store and find out!--88.111.98.95 13:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

contact information on this person

I have been cheated in dataentry jobs many times so I want to make sure that this person is genuineI want his contact no and address.He is Joe Kerz. He runs a website called www.thehomeworker.org.122.167.154.209 10:11, 1 March 2007 (UTC)thanks

You can try entering his web site name into one of the many WHOIS servers out there (eg http://www.networksolutions.com/whois/index.jsp). That should tell you the name, address and phone number of the owner of the site. However, this may not get you the data you want for two reasons: 1) Some people enter false data when they register their domain name in order to avoid Spam, etc. 2) The domain name may be owned by a web hosting company and not by the guy who actually runs it. SteveBaker 15:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you find that employers are picky about typos when you do data entry? Edison 16:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Nah, the computer knows what you mean. anonymous6494 16:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

roger penrose´s Road to Reality in Spanish?

Hello, I would like to know, wheater the bokk od Roger Penrose: Road to Reality, has been translated into Spanish. Thank you in advance. With kind regards, Alice Šimerová

Fastest Growing 'Rich' City?

Does anyone know what the fastest growing city in the developed world (North America / Asia / Australia), not including South America, Africa, Asia etc. Thanks to anyone who is kind enough to help. --IvanKnight69 12:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Asia is in both lists. StuRat 12:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Don't know if it's in the areas you're interested in, but DUBAI in the United Arab Emirates claims to be the fastest growing city, and I would not be surprised if they are right.--88.111.98.95 13:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The answer to your question depends on precisely how you define "rich" or "developed world" and how you define "city". Marco polo 14:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The city growing by the most number of people each year is probably tokyo, but that is likely to be mostly because it already has almost as many people as every other city put together in it

Game derived from football

As a kid, living in the UK, I (and kids I'd meet from elsewhere in these fair isles) used to play a playground game called "Wembley". My question is, does this game exist elsewhere in the world and if so, what's it called? Rules:

• One goal/goalkeeper would be used
• Other than the goalkeeper all players would try to score a goal
• Once you scored, you'd sit out that "round"
• Last player left was eliminated
• Rounds would be played until the final (2 players left) when they might need to score more than once to win the game.

I couldn't find an article on this game. It could be that it has a different name elsewhere (hence my question) or that someone applied WP:NFT, lol. I think Mancunian friends might have called it "World Cup". --Dweller 12:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm from New Zealand, and I've never heard of it, but it sounds fun. --IvanKnight69 12:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I used to play that game when I was a kid, the only difference was we called it FA. Ken 13:49, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Slip-slidin' away...

I have wall-to-wall carpet in most rooms, but not where spills are likely (bathroom, kitchen, entry hallway, dining room). In those places, I have throw rugs, instead. (Some rugs are needed because I don't wear shoes inside and the floor is darned cold !) The problem is that those rugs keep sliding all over the place. I've tried those with a rubber backing, but the backing seems to crumble after a few years, especially if you dare to wash them. What other solutions are there to keep the throw rugs in place ? I was thinking about two-sided tape, has anyone tried that ? How well does it work ? Would it damage the hardwood flooring ? StuRat 12:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

A good solution, if you find the rubber backing works, would be to stick some velcro to the back side of trhe rug, and the other side of the velcro to the rubber. Now you can remove the rubber for washing! Capubadger 12:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd suggest cheap netted rubber matting (I've seen it as a shelf liner most frequently). It's easy to cut to size, cheap, grips well, and can be replaced independently of your throw rugs. — Lomn 14:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't quite follow, does this rubber matting attach to the rug with an adhesive ? StuRat 15:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe the rug just sits on top, the rubber will grip the mat better than the floor anyways... Capubadger 15:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Capu is correct, the stuff just sits in between the floor and the mat. No adhesive is used. — Lomn 16:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You can get special non-slip tape for just this purpose. It has a sticky side to attach to the rug, and a grippy side for the floor. Skittle 15:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Some men have found that "You're Lookin Good Cosmetics, Toupee and Fashion Tape" at [6] does a good job of keeping their rug from moving around. Edison 16:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL. Maybe trannies also find it useful for keeping their bits and pieces in their proper place. StuRat 17:09, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

ARRGGGHHHH US TV SITES!!!!!!! GRRRRRRRRRR

GRRRRRRRR what is it with these us tv sites like NBC, showtime or whatever & your not allowed to watch the full episodes on them (cause u dont live there SHUT THE !&$% UP blah blah blah $#!@ing location thing) why do they do this!!! cause some people really like heroes, lost, prison break (etc etc')and dont like waiting every week for it, or curious to see the next episode plus how come when DVD sets for these shows come out, there like part 1 of season yeah whatever and then you gotta wait for next part 2 DVD set (stupid *!%&# %&*!?@! greedy sods want you to pay more) ARGH

XOXO :)

He sounds upset--88.111.98.95 15:35, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, the reason is that the company that made the show licenses it to TV stations around the world. Those companies aren't going to pay big dollars for the rights to the show if people can watch it online. SteveBaker 15:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

It is called Bittorrent, my friend... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 161.45.243.112 (talk) 15:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC).

Hawking's monetary worth

I read an article today [7] which said that Stephen Hawking would be taking one of those flights in a Boeing 727 to experience weightlessness. The cost was paid for by the company's owner. Also, Richard Branson has said that he'll pay Hawking's way on one of the Virgin Galactic flights in '09. This got me wondering, can Hawking not afford these trips? The Virgin flight is $200,000 according to the article so that's a bit pricey. But the 727 flight is only $3,750. Even I could scrape together four grand and I'm an idiot. I would have thought that Hawking made enough from books and personal appearances that he could afford at least the 727 flight. Not to mention that his pay as a professor should be on the higher end of the scale considering he's Stephen Freaking Hawking! Any ideas? Dismas|^(talk) 16:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... maybe the company owner is sponsering the gig for publicity reasons. Also, even remotely wealthy celebrities like possibly Stephen Hawking still might still find $200K a bit much. Rfwoolf 16:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, he has considerable medical bills as a result of his condition, so scraping together $200K may indeed be difficult. StuRat 16:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I considered the medical bill reasoning but forgot to include that. I could see where that would keep him from paying the $200K but not the $4K. Dismas|^(talk) 16:50, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Are broccoflower leaves edible ?

The broccoflower/brocciflower is a hybrid of cauliflower and broccoli. Are the leaves outside the head edible ? Do they need to be cooked first ? Do they taste any good ? StuRat 16:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I reckon you could eat them, but they might not taste very nice and could do some odd things inside you, but I you say yes they are edible :] Hidden secret 7 17:12, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Olympics

If a country is just starting to participate in an Olympics event, is it allowed to send the best team they have, even though it is substantially worse than that of the other countries? --Masatran 16:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, many countries send teams that are completely incapable of being competitive, and are quickly eliminated in qualifying rounds or qualify but then do poorly. The 1988 Jamaican bobsled team is one such example, although they did manage to come in 14th by the 1992 Olympics, better than many would have expected. The resulting experience and prestige allowed them to get funding for continued practice and equipment so that they eventually won a gold medal in 2000. Why do others do it ? Some feel it's an honor just to go to the Olympics, regardless of their chances for bringing home a medal. StuRat 16:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

2006

what is the picture of a bridge of on the back of 2006 english pound coins?

How many times did Concorde crash??? thanks

Just once, but everybody onboard was killed, and some on the ground. Because there were so few planes, this instantly made it go from one of the planes with the safest records to one of the worst safety records. StuRat 17:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

sheeps

Why are there so many sheep around kent at the moment? Is this some new EU idea, or has the price of wool increased a lot recently? There really are thousands of them all over the place, even on patches of grass along the edges of roads. Hidden secret 7 17:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

names

what does LF mean before someones name? It isn't their initials.Hidden secret 7 17:15, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

• Are they a baseball player?--Pharos 17:17, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

"I'm not a doctor..."

After reading the article on Sanka, which states:

The product was known in the 1970s for a series of television ads featuring actor Robert Young (who was also playing the television series character Dr. Marcus Welby at the time), in which he encouraged various individuals to switch to Sanka, and thus bring down their blood pressure and become less anxious and irritable.

I started wondering if this is where the phrase "I'm not a doctor but I play one on TV" came from. After doing a (very small) bit of research, I found this page which says that the commercial that got the phrase started was a 1980s commercial for Vick's cough syrup.

I then read this which says that there's a lot of confusion about the issue but it only cites anecdotal research.

So I turned back to Wikipedia and the article for Robert Young and it cites this page which only mentions Robert Young in passing. It says that the ad that made the phrase famous was for a drug company and not Sanka.

The show Marcus Welby, M.D. ran from '69-'76 which predates the Vick's cough syrup commercials. And if the '80s Vick's comment is right then he shouldn't have said "... but I play...". Instead he should have said "... but I played..." since it had been at least five years since the show ended.

So where did this start? Anyone have any better idea? Dismas|^(talk) 17:18, 1 March 2007 (UTC)