Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2012 August 12

= August 12 =

Flag of Zambia
1. What was the specific date in 1996 when the Zambian flag was modified?

2. The Zambian flag appears to be the only national flag where the decorations are concentrated in the fly, but does anyone know other flags so distinguished, of other types? They could be historical flags, supernational or subnational flags, flags of organisations or institutions, etc. --Theurgist (talk) 03:12, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Looking at this gallery, the flags of Sri Lanka and the de facto independent Nagorno-Karabakh Republic also have disproportionate decoration on the fly, but not to the extreme that Zambia has taken it. American Samoa also has most of the decoration on the fly, but it's not a country. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Looking at the same gallery, the Rwanda and Vatican City flags are also decorated similarly. Therefore, while still unusual, the Zambian flag is not as "unique" and "exceptional" as one would read. Further examples will also be appreciated. --Theurgist (talk) 03:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I wonder why they do it that way. Since the fly is hard to see as it waves in the wind, and gets damaged first as the flag ages, this seems like a poor choice. StuRat (talk) 04:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Flags of the World: Republic of Zambia has some information including legislation in 1994, but also says; "According to François Burgos the flag of Zambia was changed in 1996. The dark green was substituted for a more clear green, and the eagle which was slightly different from the one on the shield in the Arms, has been changed to be more like the one on the shield." So no clear answer I'm afraid. Alansplodge (talk) 10:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

If we found life on Mars?
Let's say that one of the many highly anticipated photos beamed down from Mars shows evidence of life. Not little green men waving at the camera, but something more subtle: A tuft of "mold" or sprigs of "grass" growing on the landscape...or a "bug" crawling across the camera lens. Would these be made public? If not, what is the process? Would the President or Pentagon be informed first, and, if so, why? Basically is there a protocol for this, mission specific to the Curiosity Lander (as opposed to the widely known first contact protocol employed by SETI regarding extraterrestrial radio signals)? Ditch &#8733; 03:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * A bunch of people at JPL are watching everything that comes in, and there are reporters wandering around, so it wouldn't be possible to keep anything like that secret -- nor would NASA want to. As soon as they were sure the observations are valid, they would issue a press release.  If nothing else, a discovery like that would guarantee them a major increase in funding. Looie496 (talk) 03:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I can't see a tuft of grass or a bug causing panic, which would be the only justification for keeping it secret. A bunch of Martians firing at and then destroying the probe, on the other hand, might cause panic. StuRat (talk) 04:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This was addressed in the MSL Sol 3 update conference. &mdash; Kieff | Talk 04:39, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Addressed, yes. Answered, no. You'd have to be a "space" lawyer to interpret the statement in that video as yay or nay.  Viriditas (talk) 10:01, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The answer was pretty clear. He said the current policy is to release everything straight away, but that they would take their time before offering their interpretation of anything like that. He also made clear that if something like that did happen it is possible the policy would change. --Tango (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There was no answer to the question "do you have a process that you can release or put on the web that will explain how NASA or JPL will handle that information", which was the same question asked by the OP up above. The reason there was no answer is because the question was never addressed. Yes, their policy is to release everything right away, and yes they will take their time with it if necessary.  But there has been no answer to the question about post-detection protocols, probably because "very little such effort has been used to identify the consequences of discovering single-celled life forms elsewhere in our own solar system. Confirmation of such fossilized or living organisms on a nearby planet or moon could still have acute effects on individuals’ world-views and raise many ethical and practical issues." Viriditas (talk) 11:16, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I don't think anyone is seriously expecting to see grass or bugs. What they might find is single-celled life or, more likely, signs that there has been single-celled life there millions of years ago. That isn't going to show up in photos; that's going to come from the other scientific instruments. I don't know their specific policies on the discovery of life, but you can be certain the scientists would be very resistant to the biggest discovery of their careers being kept secret. SETI has a protocol for what to do in the event of discovering an radio signal from an extraterrestrial intelligence - you can read a bit about it in this paper. While it does involve informing the authorities, the only intended delay before taking it to the mass media is to get confirmation from other scientists. --Tango (talk) 10:32, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Allan Hills 84001 was discovered in 1984. They are still arguing about it. Viriditas (talk) 11:17, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I see no reason to suspect that such information would be withheld. As for the process, it would likely have to filter up through many different chains of command. I suspect the President would be informed (not the Pentagon), but mostly so he wouldn't be caught flat footed when the announcement came. Presidents don't like to be surprised. --Mr.98 (talk) 14:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Given that everyone from career rocket scientists to college undergraduates work on the rover and its data, I highly doubt such information could even be temporarily withheld. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:32, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Looking for a book
Few days ago, I noticed a book named "Make your own business : Strive and Thrive" or something like that, in a book store. I forgot its full name. I want to read its review on the net before planning to purchase this book. It's a best seller book out there that has quite impressive review from renown business personality. I can't remember the author's name. Can anyone help me to find its link in the net (especially in amazon.com). Thanks in advance--180.234.53.242 (talk) 11:13, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Maybe Toxic Success: How to Stop Striving and Start Thriving by Paul Pearsall? Alansplodge (talk) 14:26, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I saw this book in amazon.com before. But that book is related to business (most probably marketing), not psychology or self-help!--180.234.85.223 (talk) 16:35, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * But you did mention "business" in your question. Alansplodge (talk) 17:27, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A web search for strive thrive business book finds "Strive to thrive: The 7 keys to business success". If that sounds right search for it. 94.101.10.162 (talk) 17:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Check it out in your local library. It is free, and if you have an e-reader you can probably download it to your device for 21 days. Viriditas (talk) 04:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Easiest route from Helsinki to northern Sweden
If RG Line does cease operations, and there is no ferry link from Vaasa, Finland to Umeå, Sweden, any more, what would be the easiest way to get by car from Helsinki to northern Sweden (say, Tärnaby in particular for example), including as little actual driving the car yourself as possible? J I P &#124; Talk 18:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The easiest way to travel by car would clearly be to go by road, via Oulu and Lulea. If you want to go by car but not to drive yourself, I guess the answer would be to get someone else to drive. Warofdreams talk 21:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * A quick scoot up and down the Gulf of Bothnia in Google Maps, suggests you are out of luck. From Vaasa to Umeå, there is the northern road route via Tornio (an 800 km drive), or getting the ferry from Turku to Kapellskär (north of Stockholm).  The last is a 1000 km drive and a lengthy ferry journey via the Aland Islands.  Astronaut (talk) 06:37, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There are car-transport trains in Finland, but apparently not in Sweden. So maybe it would be a better option to take the train to Rovaniemi and drive to Tornio, and thereafter to Sweden, from there? J I P  &#124; Talk 19:02, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

How do we know the CIA didn't smuggle in a brand-new earthquakebomb developed at Area 51?
How do we know the CIA didn't smuggle in a brand-new earthquakebomb developed at Area 51? There has been an "earthquake" in Iran recently, and we're seething at each other over their nuclear ambitions.

Could it be possible that an earthquake-inducing bomb was developed at Area 51, then brought in by Iranian-looking CIA agents (who also speak the local language very well, with flawless accents), taken underground, to detonate?

Since the "earthquake" happened in a fairly inconsequential area, I would assume that this was a test-bomb, and that the real deal will be bigger, and placed under an area near Iran's controversial nuclear facilities. In this method, they would possibly destroy said facilities and cripple their nuclear program for the last time.

The quakes in 1990 and 2003 may have been induced by secret bombs too, possibly. We've not had good relations with them since the '79 revolution.

Is there an article anywhere about such theoretical bombs that may or may not exist? I wonder how they'd work. Thanks. --70.179.170.114 (talk) 18:51, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * According to the Earthquake bomb article, they're something you have to drop, which they'd definitely call us out on. Also, Iran is in a part of the Eurasian tectonic plate right between the Arabian plane and the Indian plate. We have no evidence that the government has developed some sort of mini earthquake bomb, we have no evidence that they are developing that sort of thing at Area 51, and we have no evidence that the CIA would leave bombs over at Area 51. While the US was rather disappointed that Sharif took over, pragmatically it's not enough to go to war over. There is no pragmatic motive, and so even less evidence that the US Gov't was involved.
 * Occam's razor should lead us to the conclusion that it's just an earthquake, and nothing more. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Plus, if the CIA was that good, it wouldn't have taken 10 years to capture Bin Laden. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Unless the CIA was protecting bin Laden, which is why he was so hard to catch... ;) -- Jayron  32  19:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * What if Bin Laden was in the CIA? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 19:17, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * What if he ran the CIA. -- Jayron  32  19:19, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * We don't know. However, we have as ask ourselves, which is more likely? A massive conspiracy, and a rather ill-thought out one at that (why would you do your test detonation in an inconsequential part of an enemy country, rather than just in the Nevada desert or the middle of the ocean or somewhere else much easier and safer?), or a natural earthquake in a region we already know is susceptible to earthquakes? --Tango (talk) 21:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

What if the CIA is a ruse made up by the Freemasons, Bin Laden was Bush's vice president in hiding, and Cheney was just a decoy? My contacts at the Illuminati assure me that's not the case, though. Fnord, everybody. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:20, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, quit picking on the poor IP OP. It's not his fault. He's from Kansas. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

This is simply an arbitrary assertion. It is the equivalent of saying, "You migh be a murderer, no one knows all your moves, so prove you aren't." The appropriate response is not to attempt to prove a negative. but to say that until you provide some positive evidence, I will treat your statement as flatus vocis, a verbal fart. μηδείς (talk) 20:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Earthquakes present characteristic seismic signals. Simulating this with high explosives (or something else) is not likely to be successful. You can tell the difference, for example, between an underground nuclear detonation, and underground HE detonation, and an earthquake quite easily if you look at the waveforms. There are ample public seismic stations in the Middle East (the Iranians have their own, of course). You could, I guess, hypothesize that this magical earthquake bomb is somehow totally indistinguishable from actual earthquakes. But you might as well claim that Jesus came down and caused the earthquake — there is as much evidence and it is equally unfalsifiable.
 * As for the region of Iran, I would point out that there is pretty much at least one detectable earthquake a day in the area. It's highly seismically active, on par with Japan and California. --Mr.98 (talk) 21:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Which would imply that if IP 70 is aware of evidence to the contrary he should post it. μηδείς (talk) 22:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I guess. This is not a debating society; who cares if the OP is wrong or not? They asked a question, it's possible to give a reasonably scientific explanation as to why that's unlikely without demanding evidence to the contrary and then proclaiming the OP to be "verbally farting." I think that's a little unnecessary. The stakes are low here; there no reason to bite the questioners, even if the questions are (in your eyes) silly. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:48, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW, the problem is not that what he has asked is wrong. It is that his supposition doesn't even rise to the level of being wrong.  It is arbitrary. The point is that one doesn't waste time on disproving arbitrary requests for proofs of negatives. μηδείς (talk) 03:00, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * If you find it a waste of time, please, feel free to do something else with it, rather than be nasty to people asking questions that aren't up to your standards, or other people who are bothering to try and communicate some facts to them and others. --Mr.98 (talk) 03:26, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I am sorry, 98, was that meant as a response to the series of letters the IP has typed? It doesn't seem like one.  No one is stopping you. μηδείς (talk) 02:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Huh? --Mr.98 (talk) 03:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That arbitrary requests for proof of negatives do not merit epistemic effort is a storied philosophical position, it dates back to Aristotle at least. That such claims are flatus vocis is one of the underlying principles of science and all rational thought.  Had I called the OP an effing ayhole, rather than answer sincerely that one doesn't attempt to answer requests for negative proofs, I would have been being nasty.  I didn't, and I wasn't.  As for your bizarre concern with my supposed nastitude, go stick it in your fnord. μηδείς (talk) 03:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * In the 1978 Superman film, Lex Luthor triggered an earthquake in southern California by bombing the San Andreas fault. So it's obviously possible. (In the movies, anyway.) ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That was a plain ol' nucular bomb, and movies are movies, and Tabriz is Eureka, not LA. μηδείς (talk) 05:46, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Tabriz is a vaccuum cleaner? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

What company makes this journal?
I have a journal whose cover simply says "Journal" with a characteristic font, which journal I have seen in other places as well. It looks like a unique enough style that it would be just one company that makes it, but there is no UPC, ISBN, or identifying information on any of the inner pages. Who makes this? Peter Michner (talk) 20:58, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * What's in it? It doesn't look very distinctive to me. It just looks like that kind of blank books you can buy in any stationers to use as your personal journal/diary. --Tango (talk) 21:08, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Nothing but pages with lines. Nothing at all but that. And after searching many many result pages on Amazon, I cannot find a journal like it. Peter Michner (talk) 21:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this of any use? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That looks like the one, alright. If only they mentioned where they got it. Peter Michner (talk) 21:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * See this site. The company MeadWestvaco makes similar products. Viriditas (talk) 22:02, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Interesting the seemingly Mormon connection. Some guys at the lab use journals just like these for lab notes, and I found that I had this one (but no lab notes in mine). Peter Michner (talk) 22:25, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * AT-A-GLANCE makes similar products. Bus stop (talk) 22:05, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's official LDS merchandise: http://store.lds.org/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product3_715839595_10557_21012_-1__195627 Staecker (talk) 23:10, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops- Viriditas already gave the link. Staecker (talk) 23:11, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Assuming that is the answer, is it meant to imply that Mormons keep a special type of journal? μηδείς (talk) 03:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, in fact they do. According to Mormonism and history, "Mormon youths and their sisters are exhorted to keep journals as part of their religious commitment. Missionaries are reminded by their superiors that the journals represent a part of their sacred duties."  There's at least one website that claims this is the reason there are a higher number of LDS bloggers online than any other religion, but this is probably anecdotal. Viriditas (talk) 04:28, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps proportionally, but "than" seems incredible. μηδείς (talk) 05:36, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Note, I would be very interested if this product is made by MeadWestvaco, as it appears identical to other products they produce. Viriditas (talk) 04:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see any journals at their website; just packing materials. Peter Michner (talk) 10:51, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The AT-A-GLANCE "diary" may be comparable. Bus stop (talk) 13:05, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Those are pretty nice, but I can't figure out why the Standard Diaries are so expensive. That link goes to a $43 one, and I can't even see the big difference between that one and another $109 one at that site. Peter Michner (talk) 13:45, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * If I saw such a book in an Australian shop, I would simply assume it was made in China. Almost everything else in our shops is. It would take quite quite explicit evidence to the contrary to convince me otherwise. The OP doesn't tell us where he or she is. Most of the replies seem to assume the US. Is there a reason for such a guess? And does that make a difference to the answer? HiLo48 (talk) 17:34, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * So far, the one source I've seen for a journal that looks exactly like this is limited to this Salt Lake City-based church. Of course I don't doubt that they get their journals manufactured in China, I just haven't seen any other sellers that also sell those exact journals. Yes, I'm in the United States. If there are stores elsewhere that sell journals that look exactly like this, that would of course satisfy my curiosity just as well. Peter Michner (talk) 18:18, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting enough, this example also from the LDS (I think) has what looks like the same font and possibly same cover colour (I think the photo is just washed out) but without the outline and I think slightly less font kerning. This site not affliated with the LDS Church but selling LDS gifts also sells them  in both red and blue and in two different sizes although they are allegedly suitable for the same purposes. Strangely enough, they also offer 3 font options edit: for your name, but none of the font options seem to precisely match the examples shown. Americana comes close but all variants I've looked at don't have the right-side stroke for the uppercase U and the lowercase u have different serifs (or whatever you call it) at the top so it's not simply a case of large lowercase. Edit2: This site  also I think not afflicated with the church itself but selling LDS products and looking nearly the same as the other one in terms of description and generaly layout also sells the blue and red journals in the different sizes. Strangely enough, no sign of it on the official site unless it's something restricted to verified members only. I noticed some of the other LDS stuff seem to have a similar font   but it looks more like the real Americana at least in the case of the bible (uppercase U has no right-side downward stroke). Nil Einne (talk) 19:57, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm wondering if local Deseret Industries stores might sell similar journals? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 06:33, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Pikes Peak ownership
Who owns Pikes Peak? - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 21:46, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The people of the United States. It's a National Historic Landmark.  69.62.243.48 (talk) 21:57, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * According to that article, half of the National Historic Landamarks are privately owned, so that doesn't help with the OP's question. RudolfRed (talk) 22:07, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * This site, from the article, shows the National Park Service sign, so it appears to be managed by the federal government. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It appears to be part of Pike National Forest. Rmhermen (talk) 03:48, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Seconded: Pike National Forest. The National Historic Landmarks program is administered by the National Park Service, but unless it was already national park land, the Park Service wouldn't own it. In this case, it's the U.S. Forest Service, an agency of the Department of Agriculture.   Acroterion   (talk)   20:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * There is a renewable (hundred year?) commercial lease for Pike's Peak Cog Railway and a few residences associated with it which aren't part of the Forest Service. 75.166.207.214 (talk) 09:35, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Deus ex Human rev.
Whom did David Sarif represent in Deus Ex: Human Revolution from a real world standpoint? He seems like a corrupt being, but who? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.142.178.36 (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Have you read this? 69.62.243.48 (talk) 21:59, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

can you post the reading material here it is blocked for me so i cant read whats on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.142.178.36 (talk) 22:03, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * That would likely be a copyright violation. "Blocked for you"? You're not in China, you're in Peoria. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 23:22, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's licensed CC-BY-SA, so it's not a copyright violation. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:42, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Just guessing you dont understand the word blocked just give me the answer from the website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.142.178.36 (talk) 23:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The page doesn't say anything about who he might resemble; I don't know why that link was given as an answer to this question. --Mr.98 (talk) 23:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * It's an article about the subject as requested. Why wouldn't it be given as a link to answer the question?  69.62.243.48 (talk) 07:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Deus Ex: Human Revolution isn't a Roman à clef - its characters aren't thinly disguised representations of anyone. Sarif's chief role in the plot seems to be to trick those of us of a suspicious bent (honed to a razor in Deus Ex) that's he's really EvilAllAlong although he mostly isn't. He's largely a techno-utopian and maybe slightly a transhumanist (so you could compare him to Ray Kurzweil or Bill Gates) but really his character is so thinly drawn that he could be compared to almost anyone. -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 00:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)