Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2008 March 3

= March 3 =

Yu-Gi-Oh! Egyiptian God Cards
Hello, im a collector of Yu-Gi-Oh! cards and i am goind to be getting the so called 'Three Egyiptian God Cards' Witch are supposed to be very rare. But there seems to be very many versions of the three cards and there is only one version that is real. So, I am looking for an image of the REAL cards so i know what i'm looking for.

If anyone happens to have an image of the three cards, please link me an image.

(E-Mail removed for security purposes) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.209.218.156 (talk) 00:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

marks left on skin from clothes that are too tight
I'm use to calling these marks bed-scars or clothing-scars but using these as search terms is useless. Are there some other terms I could use to find information about marks on the skin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bejjinks (talk • contribs) 00:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * My family always called these "beens", e.g. "socks-beens" for where your socks had been. But I can't find support for this in any dictionary.--Shantavira|feed me 09:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Temporary pressure lines? Scars sounds permanent unlike "indentations" or grooves. Julia Rossi (talk) 10:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

A couple questions about Humans
Why do you humans think they a superior then any creature on this planet? (The example for this one animals don't have feelings. Many people say animals are dumb and that they aren't as smart as us. Many people say animals don't have emotions.)

Why do humans think they can destroy whatever they want without consequences? (Let's use industrialization as an example. I live near an area of open field. Its a wonderful place where animals and humans coexist. But now they are building houses in these open fields, they are building in the animals ecosystem. Pause for a moment and think about this. You live in a house you don't want someone to knock down your house to live on it. Do you? So why is okay when its an animals home?)

Why as humans do we kill for fun? (Humans hunt for a sport. Killing another creature is not a sport. We sure hate when another man kills another man, but when its an animal its okay. How does that work? How is that even possible? Heck! The murder might have been killing the other man for fun and as sport. And yet its illegal. Yes I know animal hunting is illegal, but they have those hunting parks. I don't agree with it.)

Why do humans act on controversial ways? (I'm speaking the sense of...we can kill an animal for survival because we need the meat, but animals are not allowed to kill other animals. The animals that we hate so much lions and wolves only kill farm animals because they need to survive. Is it wrong for them to want to survive?)

Thank you for who ever responds. This is a subject that I'm very passionate about. Its also a soft spot in my heart.71.142.242.233 (talk) 01:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven
 * While it doesn't address all your points, on the question as to why humans often regard ourselves as the superior species on Earth, you may be interested in our article on anthropocentrism. Warofdreams talk 03:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * And note that there are many species which kill other species for fun and pleasure and food, and humans don't care in general if animals kill other animals unless the animals getting killed are valuable to the humans. One thing that humans excel in more than most other animals is killing their own species—most other animals fight, but not nearly as often to the death. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 04:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Obviously you didn't read that closely into it. We kill animals just because they took a cow from us. That animal is only trying to survive. Do cows want to kill us just because we have to survive? No! Well their mostly defenseless. I don't see why we ban and hiss dark remarks to a creature trying to survive. What is so wrong with survival? Why is it that human race disgracing every living thing except themselves? Are we more than important in this ecosystem,this environment? Animals help us just as much as we help them. 71.142.242.233 (talk) 04:57, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven


 * Not all people think and act in the ways you describe. If you haven't already read it you might like the book Animals in Translation by Temple Grandin. Pfly (talk) 06:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Because God told us to do it in Genesis 1:28. H YENASTE 06:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Don't give me religion now. I wouldn't be able to stomach that. The people I see everyday act that way. Its disgust me and it sickens me to see them think this way. And even if they don't think consciously we probably think it subconsciously.71.142.242.233 (talk) 14:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven


 * We want to survive too. We don't kill cows for fun. The cows don't kill the wolves because they want to survive either. Some animals are predators and some animals are prey. We happen to be predators. I'm not sure why you hold us to such different standards as wolves: by your calculus, wolves kill in a noble fashion because they are hungry, but when humans kill for food, it's somehow barbaric. If a human tried to kill a baby wolf with its bare hands, you can be the wolves would retaliate! But anyway, my basic point is that you seem to be idealizing nature into some sort of friendly world. It's not. It's barbaric. It's red in tooth and claw. It's full of half-stupid violent creatures trying to either kill or avoid being killed by other half-stupid violent creatures. Any tenderness you see is likely a construction of your own mind. If I were a wild animal, I'd rather be in a zoo—constant environment, constant food supply, no predators. That's what most animals want. Humans have figured out how to consistently achieve that. Does that make them so wrong? Do you think the wolves would do us any better if they had evolved bigger brains and thumbs? --98.217.18.109 (talk) 14:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Why do you humans think they a superior then any creature on this planet?
 * Because we are. We're above them on the food chain (99.9% of the time) and we have more complex Brain functions. The fact is that animals are not as smart as us or they would have found easier ways to avoid being hungry.

Why do humans think they can destroy whatever they want without consequences?
 * How exactly do the animals and people coexist? Do the humans live in caves with bats? I understand that the increasing lack of biodiversity is a problem but if I had to choose between homeless humans or homeless frogs and cockroaches, I'd choose the latter.

Why as humans do we kill for fun?
 * Because some people honestly have fun whilst killing animals for sport. However, this is becoming increasingly frowned upon in civilised society.

Why do humans act on controversial ways?
 * See the response from 98.217.
 * Zain Ebrahim (talk) 15:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Humans think they are superior to any other creature on this planet because they haven't recognised any evidence from any other species that they think the same of themselves. Ergo they're top in a self-defining category of one. 86.140.244.220 (talk) 21:11, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm curious as to why you begin 'Why do YOU humans'? Are you not including yourself as a member of the human race?If not which species are you? Lemon martini (talk) 23:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

We want to survive too. We don't kill cows for fun. The cows don't kill the wolves because they want to survive either. Some animals are predators and some animals are prey. We happen to be predators. I'm not sure why you hold us to such different standards as wolves: by your calculus, wolves kill in a noble fashion because they are hungry, but when humans kill for food, it's somehow barbaric. If a human tried to kill a baby wolf with its bare hands, you can be the wolves would retaliate! But anyway, my basic point is that you seem to be idealizing nature into some sort of friendly world. It's not. It's barbaric. It's red in tooth and claw. It's full of half-stupid violent creatures trying to either kill or avoid being killed by other half-stupid violent creatures. Any tenderness you see is likely a construction of your own mind. If I were a wild animal, I'd rather be in a zoo—constant environment, constant food supply, no predators. That's what most animals want. Humans have figured out how to consistently achieve that. Does that make them so wrong? Do you think the wolves would do us any better if they had evolved bigger brains and thumbs?

You made my words the way you wanted to perceive. Them I didn't mean to kill them for meat. I can understand we need to survive. The human race eating is not barbaric. What is barbaric is the thought that they can step all over what they want? Destroy what they want without any consequence. In know way did I even imply that so I don't see why you did. Animals weren't meant to be caged up. I'm sorry if I were an animal I rather be able to walk were I have walked for a thousand years. Yes it does make them wrong. I'm sorry would you want to be in cage and viewed at as some show. I don't think so. Wolves are intelligent creatures just as much as we are because they have learned to survive. By the way animals aren't dumb.

How exactly do the animals and people coexist? Do the humans live in caves with bats? I answered that. I live in a open field. That means its open. Animals have their houses and we have our houses. That is coexisting in itself. I no way did I say I wanted people to be homeless. We lived caves in ancestral times with bats and other animals. We had to learn to adapt and consequently coexist. Our ancestors weren't homeless just because they lived in caves.

I'm curious as to why you begin 'Why do YOU humans'? Are you not including yourself as a member of the human race?If not which species are you?

Because I can. I didn't say I wasn't including myself, but I like to look at the world a little differently. I like to look at the world and its problems like if looking at a snow globe. I've already looked at the problem internally thats where I am living, but sometimes you need to step out of the globe to understand more.71.142.242.233 (talk) 04:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

Contact lens
Is there any particular way of disposing of contact lens? You can just toss them in the trash, can't you? I'm a bit new to wearing them.-- The Ninth Bright Shiner 02:20, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yep. Into the trash they go.  Dismas |(talk) 02:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The recycling part of the trash, of course. --  JackofOz (talk) 03:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Really? They wouldn't harden and become un-recyclable or something like that?-- The Ninth Bright Shiner 03:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm no expert (I wear spectacles, not contacts), but I very much doubt it. There are lots of very hard things (glass, metal, some plastics) that are recyclable.  --  JackofOz (talk) 03:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * In order for it to be recycled, it would have to be found in the recycling bin. Is putting the lens into a plastic bag your solution to this?  If so, how do you know they're the same type of plastic?  I thought that only similar plastics could be recycled together.  Dismas |(talk) 03:48, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I think it depends where you live. In some places, only certain things are accepted, and you have to separate the glass from the plastic from the metal from the paper, etc.  In other places, everything recyclable just goes into the one recycling bin, and people are urged to err on the side of recycling if they're in any doubt as to an item's recyclability.  --  JackofOz (talk) 04:24, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * How rare is plastic now that we are having to recycle a tiny contact lens? H YENASTE 06:31, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, afaik nobody has to recycle anything if they don't want to. I was simply making the point that if one has the opportunity to dispose of an item in the recycling bin as opposed to the general rubbish bin (and not everyone has that opportunity), one might choose the latter.  Some people might say: "For something that small, it makes no difference and it's not worth the bother to even think about it".  Others might say: "It's a question of principle, not quantity.  Every sperm is sacred; and although I might prefer not to make individual atoms my personal friends, without them there would be no universe, and then where would we be?".  --  JackofOz (talk) 07:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you watched Penn & Teller's Bullshit? They said recycling is bullshit. Just wanted to let you know.71.142.242.233 (talk) 04:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven
 * They're entitled to their opinion. --  JackofOz (talk) 07:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Footage of a recycling plant really opened my eyes (mmm) in that there were machines that selected out different plastics, paper, metals etc. Shoop. Just like that. It explains why everything goes into one recycling bin out my way. Julia Rossi (talk) 08:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like to see a machine select out a dried up old contact lens :-) --Richardrj talkemail 08:45, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Me too. Hey Mick! Got a coupla skeptics here – bring out that contact lens plucker! ; ) Julia Rossi (talk) 22:27, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm...quite an...enlightening set of answers. Alrighty, thanks for the help!-- The Ninth Bright Shiner 23:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * What tiny fraction of a gram do a pair of contacts weigh, and how does that compare to anything else made of plastic, such as a bottle that water is sold in? They would be a negligible fraction of the waste stream. Edison (talk) 03:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There does seem to be a selection process for different plastics. Perhaps asking at a pharmacy will get some answers on what people are doing with plastics of that size. I don't think size would be a problem (if you had quantity) since years ago I believe, the Body Shop and pharmacies were encouraging people to return their plastic pill containers etc for recycling. Julia Rossi (talk) 03:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Let me get this straight. Are you good folks telling me that putting small plastic/glass/metal items into the recycling bin is not only a waste of time but also a waste of money?  That seems to be the drift; because if the recycling plant can cope only with specific items for which they have a tailor-made machine, what happens to the rest of it?  The plant would have to have some way of collecting it all and somehow, somewhere, disposing of it, and that costs money that could have been avoided if those things had never been put into the recycling in the first place.  Why don't local authorities tell people that their efforts to be good recyclers are not only in vain when it comes to small items, but are also ultimately costing them money?  I have never seen any warnings remotely to this effect.  --  JackofOz (talk) 05:35, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't read the answers that way. BTW, "It has been estimated that 125 million people use contact lenses worldwide," so Ninth Bright Shiner may have found a niche in the recycling business. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

To respond to a couple of Jack's questions, I'll add my local town's recycling rules (with my emphasis added):
 * Recycling is mandatory in ***. Place only the following clean items in the recycling bin:
 * Cardboard Boxes (cut to fit bin), cereal boxes, pop can cases (NO PIZZA BOXES).
 * Office Paper - bundle with string or place in brown paper bag to prevent from blowing around.
 * Household Batteries (NO CAR BATTERIES) placed in small clear plastic bag.
 * Newspaper and everything that comes with the newspaper must be bundled with string or placed in brown bag to prevent from blowing around.
 * Plastic Bottles (1 or 2 on bottom) discard lids.
 * Glass Bottles/Jars (clear, brown and green) discard lids.
 * Phone Books/Magazines/Catalogs - bundled with string.
 * Aluminum & Tin Cans.
 * Empty Aerosol Cans - discard lids.
 * We do not recycle: drinking glasses, anti-freeze or oil containers, plastic bags, shredded paper, and lighter fluid containers. If an item is left in your bin, it is probably because it is not recyclable. Rmhermen (talk) 15:13, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

earth's circumference
Who first measured the earth's circumference at the equator? I believe there is a national forest named after him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joeschmoe219 (talk • contribs) 06:08, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Eratosthenes? Pfly (talk) 06:17, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Then the national forest is either on the seafloor or the moon. H YENASTE 06:28, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Eratosthenes was the first to compute the Earth's circumference, but it was the polar circumference, not equatorial. At the time nobody had any idea that ther was a difference anyway. Wikipedia's articles on Figure of the Earth and Equatorial bulge don't say when it was realized that there was. But Isaac Asimov's book Asimov's New Guide to Science says this:


 * A pendulum that swings perfect seconds at sea level, for instance, will take slightly longer than 1 second to complete a swing on a mountain top, where gravity is slightly weaker because the mountain top is farther from the center of the earth.


 * In 1673, a French expedition to the north coast of South America (near the Equator) found that, at that location, the pendulum was slowed even at sea level. Newton later took this finding as evidence for the existence of the equatorial bulge, which would lift the camp farther from the earth's center, and weaken the force of gravity.  After the expedition to Peru and Lapland had proved his theory, a member of the Lapland expedition, the French mathematician Alexis Claude Clairault, worked out methods of calculating the oblateness of the earth from pendulum swings.

So Clairault's work would have been at least an important step in the calculation of the equatorial circumference. Whether anything is named after him, I have no idea. --Anonymous, 23:10 UTC, March 3, 2008.

Tim Cahill (3)
What town was Tim Cahill born in? Also I already know that he was born in Sydney Australia. I just want to know the town or hospital? 220.233.83.26 (talk) 07:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Sydney is the town, since he was a child in the suburb of Balmain, Balmain? Balmain has a general hospital not afaik a "maternity hospital", but there will be some in the inner west and city suburbs you could check on. Why do you want the birth hospital? It seems a bit personal... Julia Rossi (talk) 03:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

free twins tickets
hey, I heard that if you go to Target in Minneapolis sometime in March they give you free tickets to the opening series. DOes anyone know what day and which store that they do this at? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.101.53.141 (talk) 07:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Call or go to website of Target HQ re opening series free tickets promotion? Julia Rossi (talk) 08:39, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Question related to research methodology
This is a question asked in a University examination in the area Research Methodology. Q. Four cells correct is used in: a, Survey b, Experiments c, Historical d, Case Study method The student is supposed to choose the correct answer from the four possible ones. I can't make head or tail out of this question. Can somebody help me? Thanks in advance. --59.165.190.49 (talk) 08:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * This article on statistical power, survey and research only mentions cells in the context of tables of results, I don't even understand the grammar of the question you were given, so that is all I can think of. That is, unless this is a biology experiment and they mean cell (biology) SGGH speak! 11:52, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Below the carpet
Hi all.

If I was to peel my carpet off the floor in an average (middleclass suburban australian) house, what would i find underneath the carpet? Names would be nice, and links with examples (especially pictures) would be nicer. Thanks in advance!220.237.146.20 (talk) 10:34, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'd guess underlay and concrete, on the ground floor, maybe MDF as floorboards on the 1st floor. If you mean what animals... well, most likely mice and things like that. The occasional blue tit has been known to get under the floors in my house. -mattbuck (Talk) 11:07, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Underlay is what I was looking for ( I think). And no, I'm not asking what animals insects etc. are under the carpet. Thanks!220.237.146.20 (talk) 11:16, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Also likely to find a tack strip. Huh.  We don't have an article on that.  It's a strip of wood, attached to the concrete or whatever subflooring you have, with tacks pointing up.  The tacks attach to the underside of the carpet and hold it in place.  Carpet installers will attach the carpet to the tack strip then stretch the carpet as tight as they can get it, then attach to another tack strip on the other side of the room, or somewhere in the middle depending on the configuration, so that the carpet remains taut instead of bunching up over the years.   Corvus cornix  talk  19:54, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And now there is an article. H YENASTE 01:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Average middle class suburban Aussie house?Couple of beer bottles,a few corpses lying about,the odd ball and chain and a dingo or two for evening pleasures... ;) Lemon martini (talk) 23:37, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Geez mate, I've been getting those things from down the back of the couch – with the speedos! Julia Rossi (talk) 06:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Very dissappointed with the pictures on the speedos page... Gertie100 (talk) 12:10, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Banker's Lamp
Why are banker's lamps green? And where did the banker's lamp originate? Does anyone know the history of it? It's not particularly important to me, but it's something that I found curious.

If anyone knows... let me know. Thanks in advance.

jdstroy (talk) 14:36, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Note: If this question is in the wrong category (I doubt it), please feel free to move it. If it's moved, please notify me via Talk:jdstroy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdstroy (talk • contribs) 14:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Coincidentally, we've just had a similar question at Reference_desk/Language. I would guess bankers' lamps are green for the same reason as Green eyeshades: to protect from the harshness of early incandescent lamps. AlmostReadytoFly (talk) 15:30, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info. Sounds reasonable, and I think that'll quell my curiosity.  jdstroy (talk) 01:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Designing a rugby shirt for wikipedia
In articles referring to rugby teams there is usually a shirt design showing the colours etc of the team. I have copied the code for the appropriate design from another page onto the suttonians rfc page but need to tweak the colours to get them accurate. i can do this for the shorts and socks but not the shirt stripes. where can i learn how to do this?

thanks

Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.42.105.201 (talk) 16:32, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The documentation is at Template talk:Football kit. — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 19:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

content file
I created a new page and would like to create a Content (hide/show) for this. Please let me know how to do it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.201.45.50 (talk) 19:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The Contents box is generated automatically if a page has four or more sections (ie has four or more == Headlines == ) — Matt Eason (Talk &#149; Contribs) 20:00, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * If you want to force one to appear, add where you want it. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 01:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

What is there to do in Southern California?
I have an opportunity to visit the LA-San Diego area in late March and I am brining my wife and three kids with me for a little bit of a holiday. My question is what should I do while I am there? I am familiar with Disney and the SD Zoo - but what else should I try to take in? We are pretty much open to just about anything and I am targeting my questions to residents of the area. What advice would you give your relatives or friends who were visiting the area for a week? What is the weather normally like at this time of year? Does anyone go to the beach - or is it just too cold? I know that that hockey will still have some regular season games left - but is there other sporting venues we could catch? What about concert information? Traveling to TJ and things like that?Thanks142.68.218.238 (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2008 (UTC)corpen from Nova Scotia
 * My personal favorite is the San Diego Wild Animal Park, which is a separate area from the zoo, not in the city limits of San Diego. There's also Seaworld.   Corvus cornix  talk  19:56, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * We are Scottish and visited San Diego last year and can't wait to go back. There is so much to do - and we didn't want to drive so we used the Red Trolley Service to go EVERYWHERE. Public transport is so CHEAP and convenient. Food is so varied and international and CHEAP. There's the Zoo, Seaworld, Balboa Park, Bay Cruises, Tijuana (Mexico) (on the Red Trolley), Old Town, Mission Beach (we swam in January), hire a cycle and spend a day exploring the man made lakes around the Bahia Resort. Go to Fashion Valley. Also take a wine tasting trip from your hotel to Temeculah - wonderful - especially on market-day. Take the kids to the fairground at the beach and see the street performers, skaters, dancers, jugglers, kite-flyers etc. Eat great sea food and chowder very cheaply along the water front. Visit the now retired Aircraft Carrier MIDWAY that is staffed by ex-crew members from Ratings to Admirals - they make it a truly memorable trip. Oh I could go on and on. Oh - and don't forget to go to the Spreckell's open-air Organ pavilion in Balboa Park on Sunday afternoons to take in a great concert with a "British" San Diego City Organist playing wonderful music whilst accompanying a guest opera singer or suchlike (the Star Spangled Banner was truly and deeply moving). But don't take my word for it. Visit the Wikipedia article on San Diego and also vist the San Diego Tourist Website. They are so full of information. We went for 2 weeks last year but next year we are going for 3 weeks - and I also got to practice my Spanish Spanish which the Mexican waiters etc. thought was wonderful as to them it sounded "proper and well articulated" instead of what they called "their slang version of the language". They even rewarded my wife and I with powerful free shots of Tequila for speaking with them in their language instead of English. Go - enjoy - you might see me there. 81.145.242.139 (talk) 20:33, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree with all of that and would add Legoland California (depending on age). Also, it is warm enough to visit the beaches now, and surfing seems to be popular with kids. Bovlb (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I recommend going mountain biking in the Santa Monica Mountains. Whether you can talk your wife and kids into it, you'd know better than I. But it's amazingly beautiful. Bicycle rentals are hard to find, unfortunately; last time I did it was on a piece of crap rented from an outfit on the pier, intended to be used on the (flat) bike paths along the ocean, but I and a friend managed to ride them up fire roads to Old Mulholland anyway. There are also some fantastic hiking trails. --Trovatore (talk) 00:01, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Don't forget Magic Mountain up here in Santa Clarita!  bibliomaniac 1  5  I see no changes 00:03, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would note that in my opinion, Tijuana is more than a little touristy, depressing, and poor. If you keep going south about an hour, though, you can end up in Ensenada, which is really quite wonderful—fish tacos and Bloody Mary's on the waterfront, cheap lobster and margaritas for dinner. It has been a long time since I was last there, I regret to say, but I have very favorable memories, really quite a nice place to hang around, with about a quarter as many tourists as you'll run into in TJ or Rosarito Beach, but still touristy enough to feel safe and secure. As in all of Mexico, don't drink the water. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 01:07, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * There is no eñe in Ensenada. This sort of spurious diacritic -- a kind of hypercorrection -- stands out like a sore thumb and should be strenuously avoided. Other annoying examples are latté and Habañero, neither of which has a diacritic when correctly written (in either the source language or English). --Trovatore (talk) 01:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, I see you fixed it yourself. --Trovatore (talk) 01:17, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * And if I hadn't, who cares? It's not exactly a spelling bee on here. --98.217.18.109 (talk) 14:18, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I would also recommend the USS Midway (which is really interesting, though very young kids may get bored). You could catch the San Diego Padres at PETCO Park (which is a nice new stadium right downtown) if you are here right to the end of the month. The coastal towns north of the city are really nice, especially La Jolla (where you can see seals at Children's Pool Beach, visit the Birch Aquarium, kayak into the caves at La Jolla Cove or try paragliding off the Torrey Pines cliffs) and Del Mar. A short drive into the Mountains is Julian, California, which is famous for its incredible apple pies and historic main street, and you could even take a day trip out to the Joshua Tree National Park or Mount Laguna. In addition to the SoCal theme parks, kids seem to enjoy trips to Balboa Park, especially the Reuben H. Fleet Science Center. The Mission Beach boardwalk and Belmont Park is nice on a sunny day. Also, take you kids to the Corvette Diner.
 * Personally, I would give Tijuana a miss, its a pretty depressing place. Go to Ensenada or if you really wanted to visit Mexico. However, there has been a lot of drug related violence in Northern Baja recently, so many locals have been avoiding heading over the border completely. You can always cheat and visit Old Town for a (semi)-authentic Mexican experience without the prostitutes, beggars and street thieves.


 * Weather wise, it will probably be warm and sunny (it almost always is). You should certainly be able to visit the beach, though the water will be chilly still, so you would probably want to use a suit of you were planning on surfing. I have spent the last few years taking visiting family and friends around San Diego, so feel free to drop me a line on my talk page if you have any specific questions. Rockpock  e  t  02:33, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I would highly recommend taking in some oddball alternative theater at the Steve Allen Theater at the Center For Inquiry-West. Tickets are always pretty cheap and the stuff they showcase is truly unique.  Cartoon Dump has its live iteration there, for example, and it's lots of fun.  A very small, intimate venue.  Almost literally a hole in the wall.  Plenty else to check out, as well.

Edit: Oh, drats, kids. May not be the best course of action, then, but I will still recommend that place to anyone and everyone! Poechalkdust (talk) 20:16, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Animal
Does anybody know what is the single most poisonous animal species on earth? Is it the Golden Arrow Frog, the Fierce Snake, or the Black Widow or whatever...? By the way, I mean by number of humans they kill per contact.Jwking (talk) 20:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The Black Mamba injects a large amount of venom per bite, is highly aggressive, and reputed to be the fastest moving snake in the world. Fatality rate is 100% if untreated. Beware of the Democratic Republic of Congo, that's where it lives. Vranak (talk) 21:35, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * My money would tend to sit with the Golden Poison Frog. Black mambas are more likely to kill you, but that has more to do with injecting you with so much venom than the efficacy of their venom. If you want to open the doors a bit, the most poisonous critter is probably Clostridium botulinum, maker of the ultra-powerful Botulinum toxin, but it's a bacterium, not an animal. Matt Deres (talk) 21:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * This site suggests a top eight numbered 8 to 1 inthis order, the box jellyfish, Marbled Cone snail, Blue-ringed octopus, Death stalker scorpion, stonefish, Sydney funnel-web spider (urban Australia), Inland Taipan (outback Australia), and the Golden Poison Frog. Their money is on the frog as against the taipan whose venom in one bite can kill 100 people. Julia Rossi (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Aha! I have just spotted that this is a trick question! The above species are all highly venomous, but one of the world's most poisonous animals is the dreaded fugu, a pufferfish so poisonous that the Japanese government has special restrictions on who is allowed to handle them. The poison contained in these fish is hypothesised by ethnobotanist Wade Davis to be one of the explanations for Haitian zombies. PS forgot my sig BrainyBabe (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Congestion Charge's impact on car sales
Anyone know where I can find statistics on car sales, before and after London's congestion charge was introduced? Thanks in advance Stebu2007 (talk) 21:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Try our article on the London congestion charge? Or ask on its talk pages?

The article has nothing on car sales impact.. and I didn't want to cross post between pages. I will ask there though... in the mean time has nobody got any information? Stebu2007 (talk) 16:58, 5 March 2008 (UTC)


 * While you are looking, would the same statistics tell you of any increases in moped, motorcycle, or bicycle sales? Or licenses for the first two? Might be an interesting comparison. Also, think laterally -- not just show-room sales of new cars, but second-hand bangers via Loot etc. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Double cyclones
I saw yesterday on tv, the videos of two tubes above the water. I'm not quite sure but it seemed to be just off the Buenos Aires harbour. Since I can only find ref for two cyclones in 20 years I'm wondering if this was actually happening live on TV. I couldn't find any reference online. Anyone? 200.127.59.151 (talk) 22:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Do you mean a multiple vortex tornado?--Shantavira|feed me 11:02, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Most painful area to get shot
Obviously this is discretionary, but generally speaking, where on the human body would be the most painful spot to take a bullet? Acceptable (talk) 22:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * My very uneducated speculation is that it depends, because getting shot is sufficiently traumatic that huge amounts of natural painkillers are usually released (thereby allowing them to escape from the situation in which people are shooting them). So the efficacy of that would vary from person to person and situation to situation, but I'm guessing that less critically important body parts would probably hurt more because they're easier to survive. Places with a lot of nerve endings in particular seem like they would hurt a lot, but it'd be pretty hard to get shot in the fingertip and still have any of its nerves still attached to your body, so I don't know. And I don't want to think too hard about getting shot in the genitals. It's probably safe to assume that getting shot is too excruciating to fully understand no matter where it is. --Masamage ♫ 22:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Please folks WP:BEANS The human body is not designed to be filled with holes in various parts to see which one hurts most...and you know there'll be one out there who just HAS to try it Lemon martini (talk) 23:38, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * That reaction seems...unlikely. --Masamage ♫ 23:44, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
 * According to Ed Sizemore, a firearms specialist at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, "the most painful place to be shot would be in your pelvis. The nerve bundle located there would quickly and efficiently distribute pain throughout your body." This seems consistent with the popular theory that being shot in the gut is pretty nasty too.  Rockpock  e  t  23:55, 3 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Gut as in the stomach? If one's gastric juices leaks out, how effective will it at dissolving the other internal organs? Acceptable (talk) 00:11, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * More the area of the intestines, really, which are located within the pelvis. No idea about the hydrochloric acid. --Masamage ♫ 01:59, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The likliness that your stomach acid will chemically "melt" your internal organs is pretty low. Note, it takes three to four hours for the stomach to break down a meal. By this time, the acid would become too dilute when mixed with the bodily fluids in the abdominal cavity. Nor would there be a terribly large amount of fluid in the stomach in the first place (in all likelyhood). It is more likely that the objects that were in the stomach for invade the abdominal cavity and cause an internal invection or the influx of fluid in the cavity would cause some of the organs and muscles within the cavity to malfuntion (as a result of the suddenly acidic enviroment of the abdomen). Nonetheless, medical attention would be neccessary, though the truth of this may not be so horrific as your organs melting, but probably quite painful!--Porsche997SBS (talk) 04:08, 6 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I've heard stomach and also kneecap. Vranak (talk) 00:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering how people can compare pain between being shot in one area or another. Performance artist Chris Burden explored what it felt like to be shot (in the arm) and reportedly said he way underestimated the amount of pain involved. Since a life-threatening level of pain is the body's warning signal and being shot is one of the big ones, maybe one area is not so much worse than another, maybe it's to do with the size of the area affected along with the type of bullet. Only the black knight could be so staunch. Julia Rossi (talk) 06:38, 4 March 2008 (UTC)
 * My bet is the crotch. --Ouro (blah blah) 10:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)