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

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-17-2005 12:29 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Why is it that in Western culture women with long hair are considered attractive?
Some links in the Hair Beauty category state that it's not just Western culture; in most world cultures the women have long hair. The only place we can think of where most women have short hair is in sub-saharan Africa. Women like long hair because they can style it in many more ways than short hair.
People's brains are wired to be attracted to "typical" features. In other words, your brain evaluates all the women you see and calculates what is their average hair length. This average, or "typical", hair length then becomes the "ideal length". Since most women wear their hair long, the ideal hair length is going to be long.
What about women with short haircuts that are still attractive? If you have never seen a short-haired woman before, you will not like it when you see it for the first time. But if you see enough women with short hair, your brain will recognize that a new category of "ideal" is needed. It will then calculate what is the ideal length for short hair, while continuing to maintain a separate ideal length for long hair. That is how you can be attracted to both short and long haired women. Your brain creates two separate categories, "long-haired women" and "short-haired women" and evaluates their attractiveness using different ideals.
Finally, Christianity has had only a small role, if any, in keeping women's hair long in the West. It's true that St. Paul wanted women to have long hair, and at times the catholic church has mandated it, but most women liked their hair long anyway. Long hair would still be common without any influence from the church.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-18-2005 08:15 AM
Rated G
Useless fact - What is the quickest route to world domination for the average person?
We visited the links in the Politics category and as we see it, there are three basic steps to global dominion.
The first thing you need to do is to get the attention of the people you wish to control. The quickest way to control group of people is to make them afraid. Fear has a funny way of making otherwise reasonably intelligent people very stupid and quick to panic. Create a very scary threat (of course the threat can't be associated with you in any way) just as everyone is starting to feel the fear, rise up and say, "I'll save you! Follow me and you shall survive!" This is also a great way to create a diversion so people don't find out what your true intentions are. It's kind of like; "Look, over there", when the people look away, you're no longer in their focus.
After they are afraid and busily trying to protect themselves from an imaginary foe, that's when you can really get down to business. You can do all sorts of sneaky underhanded transactions to increase your wealth and power without anyone noticing. Anything for which you must obtain mass approval, slip it in under the guise of being necessary to "protect the people". This is how you can take away their rights, making them much easier control because the law will be on your side.
You must also control the media if you're to have any chance at this world domination racket. It's all about your commercial image for those who would never be able to know you in person. Most importantly, you have to tell the people what to think. This is easier to do in more developed nations where almost every person has access to television. It's easier to spread the good news of you and your wonderful works over the TV air-waves.
Once you've got them afraid, giving up their rights and buying from the corporations that contribute to your growing wealth, you're 90% there, buddy!
What's gonna be a bummer is that somewhere in the world there will be a few people who just won't buy into the BS. It's not likely any one person could succeed at ruling the entire world, there's always gonna be the pesky independent types to keep any one man from obtaining that much power. This strategy would work great if you set your sights a little lower and settled for dominion over a country? I have a sneaky suspicion it's a proven method...
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-19-2005 06:38 AM
Rated G
Useless fact -Has anyone in the history of man ever had an IQ of 0?
An IQ of 0 is very hard to determine as the distribution of IQ scores is more-or-less Gaussian, that is it follows the famous "bell curve". The scores are adjusted based on average scores of a particular age group, thus IQ scores outside the range 55 to 145 are essentially meaningless because there are not enough people to make statistically sound statements.
IQ is a difficult thing to measure as it isn't very clear what exactly Intelligence is:
"If an IQ test is supposed to measure a person's intelligence, the question is: What is intelligence? Is it the ability to do well in school? Is it the ability to read well and spell correctly? Or are the following people intelligent?
---The physician who smokes three packets of cigarettes a day?
---The Nobel Prize winner whose marriage and personal life are in ruins?
---The corporate executive who has ingeniously worked his way to the top and also earned a heart attack for his efforts?
---The brilliant and successful music composer who handled his money so poorly that he was always running from his creditors (incidentally, his name was Mozart)?
The problem is that the term intelligence has never been defined adequately and therefore nobody knows what an IQ test is supposed to measure. In spite of this the futures of thousands of children are determined by the results of this test. The unreliability of IQ tests has been proved by numerous researchers. The scores may vary by as much as 15 points from one test to another, while emotional tension, anxiety, and unfamiliarity with the testing process can greatly affect test performance. In addition, there is a biasing effect that tester attitudes, qualifications, and instructions can have on testing. In one study, for example, ninety-nine school psychologists independently scored an IQ test from identical records, and came up with IQs ranging from 63 to 117 for the same person. While we're sure there has been at least one person born during the history of man that might have scored a 0 on an IQ test, given the controversy surrounding the testing and scoring of Intelligence, a score of 0 is suspect, at least in our minds.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-22-2005 02:40 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Which presidents have received the highest and lowest approval ratings?
According to the US Presidents category, presidential approval polls are relatively new. The Gallup Organization started the tradition in 1938, during Franklin D. Roosevelt's second term. Not surprisingly, the numbers tend to spike in times of war. The record holder for highest approval rating? President George W. Bush, who topped out at 90% in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. His father is the runner-up, with an 89% rating during the first Gulf War. Harry Truman scored 87% in April, 1945, following FDR's death and during the final stages of World War II. FDR achieved 84% after Pearl Harbor.
The all-time worst numbers belong to Harry Truman (23%), who also holds the record for the biggest range in approval rating. George H. W. Bush eventually sank to 29%. Carter hit 28%, and Nixon was at 24% before he resigned.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-27-2005 02:54 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Do cold, warm and hot drinking water all hydrate the body equally well?
According to the links in the Drinking Water category, it’s long been thought that cold fluids were better than warm fluids at delaying exhaustion, but research from the University of Minas Gerais in Brazil doesn’t back this up. Athletes exercised to exhaustion in three separate sessions: in the first they were given cold water, in the second warm water and in the third hot water. The amounts were the same each time. Results showed that the temperature of the water did not affect the time it took them to reach fatigue. What fluid temperature does affect, though, is how much you drink. Cold drinks tend to taste better, making you drink more, so keep drinks chilled where possible.
Too cold or too hot is dangerous for anyone. Apart from that, it is the amount you drink, rather than the temperature of the water.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-28-2005 12:37 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - What's so great about having a Swiss bank account?
Here's what we learned from the links in the Swiss Banks category: There's a lot of information about Swiss bank accounts floating around the ether -- most of it from businesses interested in your money. The Swiss banking industry is notoriously private. People will "find out you have a Swiss account" only if you tell them. Swiss law prohibits the bank not only from revealing your balance, but from acknowledging that you're a customer or revealing when you made your last transaction. Bankers can go to jail for violating Swiss privacy laws. Banking secrecy evaporates if a Swiss judge is convinced that you have used a Swiss bank to commit a serious crime such as financial fraud, embezzling, money laundering or drug dealing. It has to be a major crime under Swiss law, even if it was committed elsewhere.
On the other hand, it's not a major crime in Switzerland to hide money from an ex-spouse or the taxman, so an American divorce attorney and the IRS can't pry information from a Swiss bank. Some Swiss bank account "expediters" actually promote the tax evasion element. This is pretty remarkable since it's so blatantly against the law. Historically, Swiss bank accounts have also attracted money from dubious origins -- self-employed Colombian plumbers, say, or recently deposed third-world despots.
Switzerland isn't the only place that touts banking secrecy. Luxembourg and Liechtenstein prize secrecy, and so do banks based in the Cook Islands (a Polynesian tax haven roughly halfway between Hawaii and New Zealand) and in the Caribbean. The Bahamas and Cayman Islands are popular offshore banking destinations for Americans.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bob Maar
(Maar stands for Maartini)

Posts: 28608
From: New York City & Newport, RI
Registered: Feb 2001
|
posted 10-28-2005 01:13 PM
Rated G
Useless fact - Is it really dangerous to put metal in the microwave?
Some links from the Electromagnetic Field category helped us answer your question. Who among us hasn't had the impulse to stick a can of SpaghettiOs in the microwave and see if the whole thing will, maybe like, you know...blow up? Or at least black out every household in the neighborhood?
Well, while the occasional spoon left in your microwaving coffee cup won't necessarily win you a Darwin Award, this little rogue science experiment is still not without consequence.
The problem has to do with a phenomenon called "arcing." Without getting all Mr. Science on you, it seems microwaves electrically charge the air between a metallic object and the metal contained in the oven walls. This ionized air produces an electric current like a small bolt of lightning that can spark.
Sparking in the microwave is more likely when metal with sharp edges, such as forks or even crinkled aluminum foil, is left inside. And the arcing effect can actually melt or burn thin metal layers like those found in mugs with metal trim. Thus, the FDA recommends that you don't use metal and aluminum foil in a microwave, as they can damage the oven and also cause your food to cook unevenly.
| 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.
|