|
|
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Useless Fact's
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-22-2003 12:40 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - So what's the difference between a frog and a toad?
Some "authorities,"such as Webelo troop masters and various witches stirring bubbling cauldrons,will swear up and down that there's an absolute,clear-cut distinction between these two groups of amphibians,but they're mistaken.
From the standpoint of anatomy,metabolism,and evolutionary lineage,frogs and toads are basically one and the same;serious herpetologists make no formal distinction. To them,they're all frogs,members of the multitudinous order "Anura".The word "toad" is a bit of sloppy—albeit handy—slang that we have long used to describe those homely members of the family "Bufonidae",creatures that tend to have drier,wartier skin,a squatter physique,less pronounced foot-webbing,and a preference for dry land.
But even these general differences come with notable exceptions.
For example, there are highly aquatic "toads" (like the Suriname toad), and there are any number of frogs (such as the barking tree frog) that avoid water altogether except to breed.There are warty frogs with dry hides, and slimy toads with webbed feet.
To compound the imprecision, sometimes a given species of amphibian might be known as a frog in one locality,and a toad three counties over. Not only are toads not toads,technically speaking,some of them aren't even frogs—such as the horny toad, which is actually a lizard.For all of these reasons,insists San Diego herpetological authority Chuck Crumley of the San Diego Natural History Museum,"the whole frog/toad dichotomy is without scientific validity.It's artificial,it's slangy, and it's imprecise!"By God,let's put a stop to it.
~source used:"Why Moths Hate Thomas Edison" by Hampton Sides~
[ 02-25-2003, 07:03 AM: Message edited by: Bob Maar ]
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-24-2003 09:07 AM
Rated G
Useful fact - Early Clocks:
Throughout the ages, people have striven to find better ways of keeping track of time.
In the Middle Ages hourglasses were rarely used and sundials were inadequate when skies were cloudy. Strange methods were used to circumvent these problems.
England's King Alfred the Great, for example, carried a supply of candles of equal lengths. He lit each in turn to mark the passage of the hours.
The invention of the mechanical clock was influenced by monks who lived in monasteries that were the epitome of order and routine. They had to keep accurate time so that monastery bells could be rung at regular intervals to announce the seven hours of the day reserved for prayer.
Early clocks were nothing more than a weight tied to a rope wrapped around a revolving drum. Time was determined by watching the length of the weighted rope.
The discovery of the pendulum in the seventeenth century led to a proliferation of clocks and enormous public clocks.
Eventually, keeping time turned into serving time and rationing time. People started to follow the mechanical time of clocks rather than their natural body time. They ate at meal time, rather than when they were hungry, and went to bed when it was time, rather than when they were sleepy. Even periodicals and fashions became "yearly." The world had become orderly. A common expression was "regular as clockwork."
Even today, our society is preoccupied with time. We all have numerous clocks, watches, and calendars. Perhaps it's not all bad. As an anonymous author said, "Time is God's way of keeping everything from happening at once."
~source used: "Do Fish Drink Water?" by Bill McLain~
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-26-2003 03:28 PM
G
Useless fact - How do time-release medications work?
The first time-release medication was probably just a sugar- coated pill;the coating did not dissolve and release the bitter medicine until it was safely past the mouth. Many time-release medications,like Contac, Introduced In 1961, are based on that fairly simple idea:small amounts of the medication are coated with varying thicknesses of soluble material;the thicker the coating,the longer it takes to dissolve in the body.If exactly the right number of pellets of exactly the right thicknesses is in each capsule,the dose is released gradually over a fairly predictable period.
However, the release actually takes place in tiny spurts,not continuously.Some drugs that can be absorbed through the skin, like nitroglycerine,can be put in patches that release the drug both slowly and constantly.One system to deliver scopolamine to fight seasickness uses a disk with an impermeable backing,an ultrathin reservoir holding the drug,a membrane with microscopic pores to control the drug release and an adhesive surface to hold it on the skin.Some drugs,like hormone implants used as birth control,use a similar system in pellets implanted in fatty tissue under the skin.
A recently patented timed delivery system for a drug that does not dissolve in water uses a pair of separated compartments. One compartment contains a polymer that draws water into the pill through a semipermeable membrane.The inflow of water increases pressure within the pill, pushing medication out of the other compartment through a tiny hole.
~source used: "The Book of Science Questions and Answers"by C. Claiborne Ray~
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 02-28-2003 05:58 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Does ketchup always contain tomato sauce?
Nowadays pretty much so, but that hasn't always been true. In fact,"ke-tsiap" was originally developed by the Chinese in 1690 from pickled fish,shellfish,and spices.The tangy sauce spread (slowly,of course,and with great anticipation)to Malaysia and Singapore,where British sailors discovered itbeing eaten under the name "kechap".
When the Brits brought back samples,English chefs tried to duplicate the sauce's texture and flavor with mushrooms,walnuts, cucumbers,and whatever else they had available.But ketchup still had no tomatoes,which were believed by much of the world to be poisonous. Finally, in 1792,a recipe for "Tomata Catsup"appeared in a New England cookbook, "The New An of Cookery" by Richard Brigg.
~source used: "Just Curious Jeeves" by Erin Barrett & Jack Mingo~
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 03-01-2003 01:15 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - What Use Is the Appendix to Us? What Use Are Our Tonsils to Us?
Actually, tonsils and the appendix do have much in common.
They are both lymphoid organs that manufacture white blood cells. William P. Jollie, professor and chairman of the Department of Anatomy at the Medical College of Virginia at Virginia Commonwealth University,explains the potential importance of the appendix:
"One type of white blood cell is the lymphocyte;it produces antibodies,proteins that distinguish between our own body proteins and foreign proteins,called antigens.Antibodies, produced by lymphocytes,deactivate antigens.Lymphocytes come in two types:B-lymphocytes and T-lymphocytes.T-lymphocytes originate in the thymus.There is some evidence to suggest that B-lymphocytes originate in the appendix,although there is also evidence that bone marrow serves this purpose."
If our appendix is so important in fighting infections,how can we sustain its loss? Luckily, other organs,such as the spleen, also manufacture sufficient white blood cells to take up the slack.
Some doctors even suggest that the purpose of the appendix (and the tonsils) might be to serve as a lightning rod and actually attract infections. By doing so, the theory goes, infections are localized in one spot that isn't critically important to the functioning of the body. This lightning-rod theory is supported, of course, by the sheer numbers of people who encounter problems with appendix and tonsils compared to surrounding organs.
Accounts vary on whether patients with extracted tonsils and/or appendix are any worse off than those lugging them around. It seems that medical opinion on whether it is proper to extract tonsils for mild cases of tonsillitis in children varies as much and as often as hemlines on women's skirts. Patients in the throes of an appendicitis attack do not have the luxury of contemplation.
~source used: "Do Penguins Have Knees?" by David Feldman~
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 03-11-2003 07:53 AM
Rated G
Useless fact - Do Penguins Have Knees?
They sure do, although they are discreetly hidden underneath their feathers. Anatomically, all birds' legs are pretty much alike, although the dimensions of individual bones vary a great deal among species.
Penguins,like other birds, have legs divided into three segments. The upper segment,the equivalent of our thigh,and the middle segment,the equivalent of our shinbone,or the drumstick of a chicken,are both quite short in penguins.
When we see flamingos, or other birds with long legs, they appear to possess a knee turned backwards, but these are not the equivalent of a human knee. Penguins, flamingos, and other birds do have knees, with patellas (knee caps) that bend and function much like their human counterparts. The backwards joint that we perceive as a knee in flamingos actually separates the bird equivalent of the ankle from the bones of the upper foot. The area below the backwards joint is not the lower leg but the upper areas of the foot. In other words, penguins (and other birds) stand on their toes,like ballet dancers.
Penguins are birds, of course, but their element is water rather than sky. Penguins may waddle on land, but their legs help make them swimming machines.Penguins use their wings as propellers in the water, and their elongated feet act as rudders.
So rest assured. Even if you can't see them, penguins have legs (with knees).And they know how to use them.
~source used: "Do Penguins Have Knees?" by David Feldman~
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 03-11-2003 01:50 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Do the planets really make a faint "music" that you can hear?
It's a beautiful idea, this ancient notion of the "music of the spheres," but like so many beautiful ideas, it's hopelessly wrong. The Pythagorean mathematicians of ancient Greece are said to have been the ones who originated the theory that the planets and stars whirl about us with such elegance and perfect proportionality that they actually play an ethereal harmony that can be heard by the naked ear, if the stargazer is willing to listen intently enough (and drink enough wine).
Of course this is entirely imaginary, the kind of rapturous sentiment that only a mathematics-crazed mystic could have dreamed up. The Pythagoreans argued that the cosmos was pleasingly purposeful, like a lyre strung up for our benefit, and we lucky earthlings were sitting in the sweet spot at the center of the whole celestial show.
Even after Copernicus figured out that, on the contrary, the sun was at the hub of things, the idea of the music of the spheres wouldn't go away. "Give air to the heaven," wrote German astronomer Johannes Kepler in the late 1590s, "and truly and really there will be music . . . which pure spirits sense with no less enjoyment than man experiences when listening to musical chords." \
In his 'Harmonice Mundi' of 1619, Kepler went on to assign actual notes and harmonic relationships to the different planets, and this, in turn, inspired classical musicians from Johann Strauss to Gustav Hoist to attempt their own interpretations of the celestial spheres.
Today, of course, we know that far from being serene, outer space is a place of volatility and crashing violence—dying stars, smashing asteroids, greedy black holes. We can't exactly hear any of this ruckus, since sound doesn't travel in the vacuum of space. The best astronomers can do is train their radio telescopes on the heavens, and when they do, they pick up a deafening cacophony of clicks and bumps and fizzes. It's a discordant world out there, more Johnny Rotten than Johann Strauss.
~source used: "Why Moths Hate Thomas Edison" by Hampton Sides~
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 03-12-2003 10:16 AM
Rated G
Useless fact - Is it true that the Mormon Church used to consummate marriages at the temple during the marriage ceremony?
Although it's an intriguing common bit of anti-Mormon propaganda, it's patently untrue. As with all temple rites, the church holds forth that marriage rites are "sacred, not secret."
This was true in the early days of the Mormon Church and in today's temple as well. A Mormon marriage takes place in a room that's reserved only for the administration of marital rites (called a "sealing room").
The ceremony goes something like this: The (fully clothed) man and woman kneel down on a padded altar, not unlike the kneeling altar in Catholic churches, facing one another and holding hands while the priest (also fully clothed) recites vows. This all takes place in less than a minute and culminates in the priest asking the man and woman if they are sure they wish to be wed, asking if either person feels coerced into theunion.
The priest then blesses the couple, makes wishes for them to spawn many children, and gives them a few quick reminders on how to create a happy marriage.
After coming out of the sealing room, the couple exchanges rings and has a picture or two snapped, and that's it.
Many modern couples choose to have a more traditional wedding ceremony and reception following the official temple marriage.
~source used: "Just Curious About History, Jeeves" by Erin Barrett & Jack Mingo~
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|