now this, this is funny...
Norm D. Plumber
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8275530/Second-sun-on-its-way.html
"...said the explosion could take place before the end of the year –
or indeed at any point over the next million years."
Filed under "bozo wants his name in the papers".
--
"the source of prosperity is disposable income" -Epicromulus
Quadibloc
> Let's all get in a panic over this, shall we?
>
>
> "...said the explosion could take place before the end of the year –
> or indeed at any point over the next million years."
>
> Filed under "bozo wants his name in the papers".
The article is missing the most important detail.
<http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=11338>
Recent observations have shown that Betelgeuse has shrunk in size 15%
compared to its size in 1993.
Thus, while in 1992, indeed, there was no reason to think that
Betelgeuse would become a supernova any time soon, and the most likely
time of that taking place would be perhaps a million years in the
future, big things have happened on Betelgeuse the light from which is
reaching us NOW.
So, for us to see Betelgeuse going supernova sometime in, say, the
next 15 years or so, is a real possibility. It's also, of course,
possible that it is just becoming some type of pulsating star as its
life is nearing its end, instead of this being the immediate prelude
to a supernova explosion.
So it isn't a question of Betelgeuse going supernova any time in the
next million years with a 1 in a million chance for next year. It's
more like a 50/50 split between the next couple of decades... or the
original estimate of a million years to go still being the case.
John Savard
Cryptoengineer
> On Jan 22, 7:50 am, "Norm D. Plumber" <nom-de-pl...@non.com> wrote:
>
> > Let's all get in a panic over this, shall we?
>
> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8275530/Second-sun-on-its-wa...
>
> > "...said the explosion could take place before the end of the year –
> > or indeed at any point over the next million years."
>
> > Filed under "bozo wants his name in the papers".
>
> The article is missing the most important detail.
>
> <http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=11338>
>
> Recent observations have shown that Betelgeuse has shrunk in size 15%
> compared to its size in 1993.
[...]
I see the report is from New Scientist, which is fairly respectable,
but the site you linked is....
....weird.
pt
William Hyde
> Recent observations have shown that Betelgeuse has shrunk in size 15%
> compared to its size in 1993.
Any idea as to the error bars on that estimate? I don't see any in
the article.
William Hyde
Robert Carnegie
> Let's all get in a panic over this, shall we?
>
> http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8275530/Second-sun-on-its-way.html
The Telegraph getting stories from the Daily Mail (as it says)? Good
god indeed. What it gets up to on its own is bad enough.
Here's the Mail online:
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1349383/Betelgeuse-
second-sun-Earth-supernova-turns-night-day.html>
"Cosmic phenomenon: The Earth could soon see two suns - just like Luke
Skywalker saw on Tatooine in the Star Wars film (pictured)"
<http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1203486/Sharpest-
images-Betelgeuse-reveal-explosive-red-supergiant-loses-mass.html>
is relatively sane Betelgeuse coverage from 2009 in the same paper.
David V. Loewe, Jr
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090609220555.htm
--
"It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries
to build a tradition."
Admiral Andrew Cunningham at Crete
Dorothy J Heydt
"Since the 1921 measurement, its size has been re-measured by
many different interferometer systems over a range of wavelengths
where the diameter measured varies by about 30 percent," Wishnow
said. "At a given wavelength, however, the star has not varied in
size much beyond the measurement uncertainties."
That doesn't give you numeric error bars, though it hints that
they may not be very impressive.
The bottom of the _Science Daily_ article referenced above says
it got its data from the University of California at Berkeley.
It doesn't give a direct link to Professor Townes's edress or
anything useful like that, but if you have buddies in the
astronomy business they may be able either to give you the data
or ito ask Prof. Townes for them. I can imagine the Professor, who
is 94, may be a little bit tired of answering questions from the
general public.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
Dorothy J Heydt
David V. Loewe, Jr <dave...@charter.net> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 09:23:43 -0800 (PST), Cryptoengineer
><pete...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Jan 22, 11:19 am, Quadibloc <jsav...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>>> On Jan 22, 7:50 am, "Norm D. Plumber" <nom-de-pl...@non.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Let's all get in a panic over this, shall we?
>>>
>>> >http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8275530/Second-sun-on-its-wa...
>>>
>>> > "...said the explosion could take place before the end of the year –
>>> > or indeed at any point over the next million years."
>>>
>>> > Filed under "bozo wants his name in the papers".
>>>
>>> The article is missing the most important detail.
>>>
>>> <http://www.redicecreations.com/article.php?id=11338>
>>>
>>> Recent observations have shown that Betelgeuse has shrunk in size 15%
>>> compared to its size in 1993.
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>I see the report is from New Scientist, which is fairly respectable,
>>but the site you linked is....
>>
>>....weird.
>
>http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090609220555.htm
Those interested in gruesome speculation about what a nearby
supernova could do to a planet at about our level of technology
can re-read Anderson's "Day of Burning" (original title,
"Supernova"), and get all sorts of gory details.
And then they can remind themselves that Valenderay, in the
story, was three and a half light-years from Merseia, and that
Betelgeuse is ...
/pause to check
... about 643 light-years from here. (Sorry, my ASCII set
doesn't have a plus-or-minus sign).
So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
Robert Bannister
Wonder if we'll get Wise Men (or Women) following a star this time round.
--
Rob Bannister
David DeLaney
>Those interested in gruesome speculation about what a nearby
>supernova could do to a planet at about our level of technology
>can re-read Anderson's "Day of Burning" (original title,
>"Supernova"), and get all sorts of gory details.
>
>And then they can remind themselves that Valenderay, in the
>story, was three and a half light-years from Merseia, and that
>Betelgeuse is ...
>
>/pause to check
>
>... about 643 light-years from here. (Sorry, my ASCII set
>doesn't have a plus-or-minus sign).
>
>So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
>but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
... so we might not be forced to eat Sir Robin's minstrels?
Dave "pity" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Dorothy J Heydt
David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>Those interested in gruesome speculation about what a nearby
>>supernova could do to a planet at about our level of technology
>>can re-read Anderson's "Day of Burning" (original title,
>>"Supernova"), and get all sorts of gory details.
>>
>>And then they can remind themselves that Valenderay, in the
>>story, was three and a half light-years from Merseia, and that
>>Betelgeuse is ...
>>
>>/pause to check
>>
>>... about 643 light-years from here. (Sorry, my ASCII set
>>doesn't have a plus-or-minus sign).
>>
>>So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
>>but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
>
>... so we might not be forced to eat Sir Robin's minstrels?
Sorry, I don't get the connection. I assume it's from
_Python/Grail_. and I do just barely remember Sir Robin's
annoying minstrel, but I still don't get the connection.
Tim McDaniel
Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>In article <slrnijmru...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
>David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>>Those interested in gruesome speculation about what a nearby
>>>supernova could do to a planet at about our level of technology
>>>can re-read Anderson's "Day of Burning" (original title,
>>>"Supernova"), and get all sorts of gory details.
>>>
>>>And then they can remind themselves that Valenderay, in the
>>>story, was three and a half light-years from Merseia, and that
>>>Betelgeuse is ...
>>>
>>>/pause to check
>>>
>>>... about 643 light-years from here. (Sorry, my ASCII set
>>>doesn't have a plus-or-minus sign).
>>>
>>>So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
>>>but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
>>
>>... so we might not be forced to eat Sir Robin's minstrels?
>
>Sorry, I don't get the connection. I assume it's from
>_Python/Grail_.
JFGI. The top hit for
Sir Robin's minstrels
is "Sir Robin's Song" at <http://www.stmoroky.com/sirrobin/song.htm>
which ends
Provided by Sir Robin's talented minstrels, an inspiring ballad
expressing their admiration for this legendary figure (and his
legendary cowardice...er, bravery!).
... At this point an increasingly apprehensive Sir Robin
interrupts his faithful minstrels and, as King Arthur and his
knights were forced to eat Robin's minstrels in the frozen land of
Nador (and there was much rejoicing!), tragically the remaining
lyrics of this stirring and inspiring ballad are lost forever. The
closest we ever come to a conclusion to this song is the following
stanza, heroically improvised (despite Sir Robin's vehement
protestations) as the brave knight of the round table flees...er,
victoriously rides away from an encounter with the three-headed
knight in the dark forest of Ewing:
Brave Sir Robin ran away.
Bravely ran away, away!
When danger reared its ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
Yes, brave Sir Robin turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
Bravely taking to his feet
He beat a very brave retreat,
Bravest of the brave, Sir Robin!
And later, as Sir Robin rejoins his sovereign king:
He is packing it in and packing it up
And sneaking away and buggering up
And chickening out and pissing off home,
Yes, bravely he is throwing in the sponge.
In brief, there is no need to "Run away!" (a recurring phrase in the
movie).
--
Tim McDaniel, tm...@panix.com
Quadibloc
> I see the report is from New Scientist, which is fairly respectable,
> but the site you linked is....
>
> ....weird.
I didn't check, just grabbing a result from Google that corresponded
to what I remembered reading a while back.
John Savard
Quadibloc
> So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
> but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
Fortunately; we wouldn't want to live in such "interesting times".
John Savard
Wayne Throop
:::: but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
::: ... so we might not be forced to eat Sir Robin's minstrels?
:: Sorry, I don't get the connection. I assume it's from
:: _Python/Grail_.
Slightly less brief but more importantly, times wouldn't be so hard as
they were in the frozen land of Nordor, where Arthur and the Knights
were forced to eat the minstrels.
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Gene Wirchenko
Heydt) wrote:
[snip]
>Those interested in gruesome speculation about what a nearby
>supernova could do to a planet at about our level of technology
>can re-read Anderson's "Day of Burning" (original title,
>"Supernova"), and get all sorts of gory details.
>
>And then they can remind themselves that Valenderay, in the
>story, was three and a half light-years from Merseia, and that
>Betelgeuse is ...
>
>/pause to check
>
>... about 643 light-years from here. (Sorry, my ASCII set
>doesn't have a plus-or-minus sign).
>
>So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
>but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
Not for about 600 years it would not be.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Quadibloc
> >So it still oughta be interesting, if it happens in our lifetime,
> >but not nearly as interesting as Valenderay was for Merseia.
>
> Not for about 600 years it would not be.
What she "meant to say" was obviously "if it happens on Betelgeuse at
a time which we, in our reference frame, would view as 643 years
before any time which is part of our lifetime". Or "if the supernova
takes place at such a time that the energy from the supernova reaches
us in our lifetime".
Or just take "it happens" to mean the energy reaching us instead of
the actual explosion.
It isn't really a mistake to avoid phrasing of that level of
awkwardness.
John Savard
Robert Carnegie
Indeed, conventionally in non solar-system astronomy (at least) "it
happens" when we see it happening, whilst remembering that that isn't
quite physically the case. After all, thanks to Einstein, there is no
such thing as "exactly now, somewhere else", any more. And therefore
not "exactly x years ago" either. That is to say, someone in a rocket
ship traversing the solar system quite quickly could compute
"truthfully" that the time since an event occurred some distance away
is less or more than an observer on Earth says - within certain
limits.
I'm not sure what happens with e.g. Mars or Jupiter, which are a
matter of hours away at most.
I think there's an argument for making the frame of reference in which
Betelgeuse exists, which in fact I presume isn't very different from
Sol's relativity-wise, be the frame in which you calculate duration.
But that could be very fiddly, and, for instance, if/when it /does/ go
kaboom, I think its outsides /may/ be moving at respectable
relativstic speed, including towards us. And anyway, counting it
"now" when you see it is just darned easier.
When (if) we do have interstellar travel, we may have to reconsider.
Dorothy J Heydt
In fact, "Day of Burning" begins with the head honcho Merseian
saying, "You're claiming that Valenderay is going to turn into a
supernova?" and Falkayn answers, "No, I'm telling you that it
already HAS, but the wave hasn't reached you yet."
Howard Brazee
much bigger effect on life on Earth.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
Dorothy J Heydt
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
>much bigger effect on life on Earth.
True. Whenever that happens to be.
http://volcanoes.usgs.gov/yvo/faqsfactivity.html
Quadibloc
> In article <o3npj6lp965afvrm7sp9qici1u7frqi...@4ax.com>,
> Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>
> >It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
> >much bigger effect on life on Earth.
>
> True. Whenever that happens to be.
It's a good thing that we're planning to acquire the capability of
deflecting any dinosaur-killer class asteroids headed our way.
Since the Yellowstone caldera seems to be the successor to the Deccan
traps that our age must face, I hope that eventually some attention
will be found to developing a way to drain away the magma weakening
the crust in that area in a safe and controlled fashion.
John Savard
"An ancient wonder is reborn... out of something that could have been
so tragic."
"True. But we had Nature with us in this crisis. Man and Nature
together are more than a match for *any* robot threat."
Dorothy J Heydt
Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote:
>
>Since the Yellowstone caldera seems to be the successor to the Deccan
>traps that our age must face,
Maybe.
>I hope that eventually some attention
>will be found to developing a way to drain away the magma weakening
>the crust in that area in a safe and controlled fashion.
Well, they're talking about doing a borehole in the Campi Flegri.
Norm D. Plumber
>It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
>much bigger effect on life on Earth.
If you start on that I'll need to cover my ears and say "NA NA NA NA
NA..." really loud.
I try to look on the bright side. It's more likely that I'll die in
an automobile accident or have heart failure or be in a 7-11 that's
getting robbed and get hit by a richochet.
The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
some miserable nursing home.
I consider the idea of "some natural astronomical disaster that
destroys the entire earth" to be Not A Problem.
Michael Stemper
>Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>>It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
>>much bigger effect on life on Earth.
>
>If you start on that I'll need to cover my ears and say "NA NA NA NA
>NA..." really loud.
ObXKCD: <http://www.xkcd.com/851/>
>I try to look on the bright side.
I always look on the bright side of life.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
91.2% of all statistics are made up by the person quoting them.
Robert Carnegie
I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. It may
be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
Chris
...or within about 2000 miles of them...in which case you're screwed
from the tsunami when the Azores undersea cliff lets go, or when most
of the west coast slides into the sea. Or, if you're in OR or WA,
you'll just starve or freeze when Yellowstone lets go, because the
crops will fail.
There is no hope.
Chris
Robert Bannister
> Howard Brazee<how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>
>> It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
>> much bigger effect on life on Earth.
>
> If you start on that I'll need to cover my ears and say "NA NA NA NA
> NA..." really loud.
>
> I try to look on the bright side. It's more likely that I'll die in
> an automobile accident or have heart failure or be in a 7-11 that's
> getting robbed and get hit by a richochet.
>
> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
> some miserable nursing home.
I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
maggoty and putrescent.
--
Rob Bannister
Dorothy J Heydt
Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. It may
>be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
Vulcanologically speaking, this is true. Keep in mind, however,
that there is NO safe place anywhere on Earth. You can, to a
certain extent, choose the dangers you wish to avoid. If
earthquakes and volcanoes scare the bejeepers out of you, pick
somewhere like the Laurentian Shield, or Canadian Shield as it's
frequently called.
http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/encyclopedia/images/CanadianShield.jpg
Hasn't been any tectonic activity there in a looooong time. Of
course there are other problems, like heavy-duty cold snowy
winters.
Or if heavy-duty cold snowy winters scare you, move to Southern
California (and risk earthquakes, also firestorms and mudslides)
or Florida (and risk tsunamis and hurricanes). Personally, I'm
willing to live in earthquake country and in fact have lived in
it all my life, but if I lived anywhere in that part of central
North America known as Tornado Alley, I'd *move*. (Actually I'd
move away from Florida and the Laurientian shield too;
earthquakes are my choice of risk in a risk-abundant world.)
But there's no place safe; we live on a wild planet, not a tame
one, and the best we can do is to choose our risks. (If we can.
A lot of us couldn't afford to move at this stage. We can't
afford to move from bankrupt Vallejo back to hanging-in-there
Berkeley or Albany, and with a three-year-old in the family the
situation a couple years down the road looks increasingly
not-our-choice-of-risk.)
Dorothy J Heydt
Chris <chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. �It may
>> be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
>
>...or within about 2000 miles of them...in which case you're screwed
>from the tsunami when the Azores undersea cliff lets go, or when most
>of the west coast slides into the sea.
The west coast is NOT going to slide into the sea. Anyone who
knows anything about plate tectonics knows that. In order to get
the west coast sliding into the sea, the North American Plate
would have to be sliding *UNDER* the Pacific Plate, and it
isn't. Mostly we're sliding *past* the Pacific plate, in a
northwesterly direction, which is why we get those jokes about
how in N million years San Francisco is going to be right next to
Los Angeles and be very annoyed. The only place any subduction
is going on around here is in the Pacific Northwest (Washington,
Oregon, British Columbia), where the North American Plate is
sliding *over* what's left of the Juan de Fuca plate. That's why
you get all those lovely Cascade Mountains that occasionally blow
up.
>Or, if you're in OR or WA,
>you'll just starve or freeze when Yellowstone lets go, because the
>crops will fail.
Mmmmmm, maybe. Don't forget that the general trend of air
currents on this planet (the Jet Stream, et cetera) is
west-to-east. So while a caldera explosion in Yellowstone would
cause serious ecological trouble all over the planet, the states
downwind of Wyoming -- the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota,
Iowa, and I have no clue how much further east, north, and south --
will get a lot more ashfall than the states west and upwind of
it.
As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
Walter Bushell
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
> and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
> risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
> likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
> lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
Scatter you descendants all over the place. Won't most of the effects of
Yellowstone be limited to the Northern Hemisphere?
--
The Chinese pretend their goods are good and we pretend our money
is good, or is it the reverse?
Walter Bushell
Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
> be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
> maggoty and putrescent.
Could be better than hanging on with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's in a
death watch camp for a decade or two.
My father was contemplating taking his boat out to sea when he got too
old. But he stated the problem is that you have to do it while you still
can and that means you probably still have some quality of life.
Dorothy J Heydt
Do you have any family? Any friends as close as if they were family?
Any kind of insurance?
I was reading recently a story by mystery writer Catherine Aird
in which a mother and her adult daughter just can't cope with
Grandma any longer. She's completely mental, can't do *anything*
to take care of herself, she's running her daughter and
granddaughter ragged, and yet they have *just* enough money that
they don't qualify for public support, but not nearly enough
money to pay for a nursing home or even a part-time caregiver.
We pick all this up tangentially from their conversation as they
get Grandma dressed to go to the swimming pool in the next county.
Bathing suit; clothes over that. Son-in-law drives them to the pool
and waits. They undress Grandma down to the bathing suit, gently
leader her into the pool, get her into the shallow end and get
her to hold on to the edge, which she will do for hours if no one
tells her to do something else. Then they leave. It's hours and
hours before any of the pool staff notice her, and she has no ID....
My husband and I live with our daughter and son-in-law since he
lost his job and couldn't get another, three years ago. I hope
and trust that they can cope somehow. My son long ago promised
me that if I got old and doddering he'd pay for my nursing home
care, but he's an arts graduate who now works as a janitor and
assorted management type at a peep show*, and is studying to be a
bartender. He'll never have the money.
_____
*I sometimes tell people "He does stagecraft and other support
work at a little theatre," which is *almost* true, depending on
whether I think they'd be upset to hear the truth. In fact, the
peep show he works at is employee-owned and unionized, and the
customers are never allowed to touch the performers, let alone
anything else. As peep shows go, it's not so bad. I keep
telling myself.
http://current.com/participate/vc2/89641909_lusty-lady.htm
(The guy with the red-dyed hair, chairing the meeting at about
1:17 and following, is my son Tristan.)
Kurt Busiek
> In fact, the
> peep show he works at is employee-owned and unionized, and the
> customers are never allowed to touch the performers, let alone
> anything else.
At a peep show, the customers can't get near the performers, much less
touch them, since there's a glass wall or other such barrier through
which the customer "peeps" between them.
Without the barrier, it'd just be a strip joint.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
Dorothy J Heydt
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <LFJz2...@kithrup.com>,
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
>> As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
>> and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
>> risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
>> likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
>> lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
>
>Scatter you descendants all over the place. Won't most of the effects of
>Yellowstone be limited to the Northern Hemisphere?
The last one seems to have. However, I googled on "Yellowstone
caldera eruption effects" and found oodles of sites, many of them
obviously bullbleep. This one looks fairly trustworthy,
particularly since it's published by the American Geologist
Institute and the page's title is "Truth, fiction and everything in
between at Yellowstone." One senses that the author has
maintained a certain mental balance.
http://www.agiweb.org/geotimes/june05/feature_supervolcano.html
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.
n
Dorothy J Heydt
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <8q6ij1...@mid.individual.net>,
> Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
>> be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
>> maggoty and putrescent.
>
>Could be better than hanging on with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's in a
>death watch camp for a decade or two.
>
>My father was contemplating taking his boat out to sea when he got too
>old. But he stated the problem is that you have to do it while you still
>can and that means you probably still have some quality of life.
I spent two weeks in a nursing home ten, no, twelve years ago
now. Half the facility (which was extremely well-run) was
devoted to post-op or post-other stuff care, like hip
replacement surgery; I was in there recovering from pancreatitis
for which I was still NPO and was being fed through a PICC line
(a superduper IV). The other half was devoted to old people who
would never leave the place except feet first; and the front door
was always locked from the inside and the outside, to keep
Alzheimer's patients from getting up and going back home (as of
1943). It was sad. Most of them were completely marble-free by
now. Some sat in wheelchairs in the corridor just outside their
rooms. Some sat in their rooms and watched television. Some lay
in bed and did nothing. It was sad; but the staff kept the
patients warm, clean, fed, and if possible, entertained. The
weeks I was there, my husband brought in my laptop and talked to
the staff engineers so that everyone was sure it would bollix
anything if I got online, and by the time I left the management
were considering getting Web access for those patients who could
use it, so they could send email to their families and watch
their favorite soaps and whatever. I imagine it was very
expensive; thank God my husband's insurance covered it.
Howard Brazee
humans. I'm not thinking of the name of one that was huge in India
in prehistoric times.
David DeLaney
>The only place any subduction
>is going on around here is in the Pacific Northwest (Washington,
>Oregon, British Columbia), where the North American Plate is
>sliding *over* what's left of the Juan de Fuca plate. That's why
>you get all those lovely Cascade Mountains that occasionally blow up.
...suddenly I have a proposal for the Mythbusters episode to end all
Mythbusters episodes. (Perhaps literally.)
>As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
>and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
>risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
>likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
>lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
It could be worse. ObSF: Moira J. Moore's _Hero_ series, where the magic-
workers, in pairs, spend a good deal of time channelling energy away from
various weather and nature occurrences that left to themselves would wreak
havoc on various locales. Also, to a more extreme extent, Rachel Caine's
_Weather Warden_ series, where our planet ACTIVELY wants to scrape humanity
off its surface almost any way it can and (again) the magic-users spend nearly
all their time and effort preventing that.
Betelgeuse, Yellowstone ... have we added "all the methane on the ocean floors
suddenly decides to come up and visit us", or "asteroid strike in the ocean"?
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
David DeLaney
That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
Norm D. Plumber
Do you think you'll care after the fact?
If I had died at age 20 when I was riding a motorcycle faster than
sanely possible[1] over twisting roads, that would have been a
reasonable end to it.
It would not, however, have maximized the suffering experienced during
my lifetime[2], thus I was doomed to survive[3].
If the Yellowstone "supervolcano" erupts, at least it will spice
things up for a bit, unlike sitting in a wheelchair in a nursing home
having baby food spooned into my drooling mouth by a candystriper who
leans over displaying her cleavage which, for some reason, I recall
that I should find interesting, if only I could remember why.
Nope, I'd much prefer to flame out than grow old and moldy, which of
course comes amazingly close to totally guaranteeing a future
containing lukewarm babyfood.
Note to self: Get tattoo saying "if you don't remember this tattoo go
play on the freeway *now*".
[1] You never really know how fast you can go until you fall off.
[2] Prime objective of Murphy (of Murphy's Law fame).
[3] Though I didn't consider it doom at the time... I thought it was
very cool to get so high just from adrenaline. I'd never yet been
posessed by "the whole catastrophe".
Howard Brazee
DeLaney) wrote:
>
>Betelgeuse, Yellowstone ... have we added "all the methane on the ocean floors
>suddenly decides to come up and visit us"
John Barnes - _Mother of Storms_
Michael Stemper
>In article <71478b91-eabb-4d79...@f2g2000vby.googlegroups.com>, Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. It may
>>be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
>
>Vulcanologically speaking, this is true. Keep in mind, however,
>that there is NO safe place anywhere on Earth. You can, to a
>certain extent, choose the dangers you wish to avoid. If
>earthquakes and volcanoes scare the bejeepers out of you, pick
>somewhere like the Laurentian Shield, or Canadian Shield as it's
>frequently called.
>
>http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/encyclopedia/images/CanadianShield.jpg
>
>Hasn't been any tectonic activity there in a looooong time. Of
>course there are other problems, like heavy-duty cold snowy
>winters.
>
>Or if heavy-duty cold snowy winters scare you, move to Southern
>California (and risk earthquakes, also firestorms and mudslides)
>or Florida (and risk tsunamis and hurricanes). Personally, I'm
>willing to live in earthquake country and in fact have lived in
>it all my life, but if I lived anywhere in that part of central
>North America known as Tornado Alley, I'd *move*.
Each, as they say, to their own dangers. It's probably just because
it's what I'm used to, but I'll take tornadoes over hurricanes. Most
of the time, a tornado just blasts through, and half an hour later
your house either is or is not matchsticks. Hurricanes seemingly
linger on forever.
> (Actually I'd
>move away from Florida and the Laurientian shield too;
The Laurentian Shield has to be about the safest place on Earth.
Why would you move away from it?
>
>But there's no place safe; we live on a wild planet, not a tame
>one,
ObNarnia: "It's not a tame planet!"
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
If it's "tourist season", where do I get my license?
Michael Stemper
>In article <33ee1b74-cc7a-4cd0...@d23g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
Chris <chris.li...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. It may
>>> be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
>>
>>...or within about 2000 miles of them...in which case you're screwed
>>from the tsunami when the Azores undersea cliff lets go, or when most
>>of the west coast slides into the sea.
>>Or, if you're in OR or WA,
>>you'll just starve or freeze when Yellowstone lets go, because the
>>crops will fail.
>
>Mmmmmm, maybe. Don't forget that the general trend of air
>currents on this planet (the Jet Stream, et cetera) is
>west-to-east. So while a caldera explosion in Yellowstone would
>cause serious ecological trouble all over the planet, the states
>downwind of Wyoming -- the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota,
>Iowa, and I have no clue how much further east, north, and south --
>will get a lot more ashfall than the states west and upwind of
Based upon the diagrams of previous events shown at:
<http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm>,
you've about nailed the eastern extent. Didn't even hit the
Twin Cities.
John F. Eldredge
Of course, world-wide agricultural production will be down noticeably for
at least a year or so afterwards. The eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815
kicked up enough dust to produce "The Year Without a Summer" in 1816.
Most of the northern hemisphere had crop failures; I haven't seen much
discussion of how much effect there was on the southern hemisphere.
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly
is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
Walter Bushell
"Norm D. Plumber" <nom-de...@non.com> wrote:
> Note to self: Get tattoo saying "if you don't remember this tattoo go
> play on the freeway *now*".
Now that would be traumatic at best for the person who was driving the
car that hit you.
Dorothy J Heydt
ITYM "wouldn't have hit the Twin Cities, had they been there at
the time."
("Hm, Sodom and Gomorrah were in an active tectonic zone......")
Dorothy J Heydt
David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>The only place any subduction
>>is going on around here is in the Pacific Northwest (Washington,
>>Oregon, British Columbia), where the North American Plate is
>>sliding *over* what's left of the Juan de Fuca plate. That's why
>>you get all those lovely Cascade Mountains that occasionally blow up.
>
>...suddenly I have a proposal for the Mythbusters episode to end all
>Mythbusters episodes. (Perhaps literally.)
You would have to evacuate all the Pacific Coast cities first, or
else you'd have lawsuits that all the lawyers on the planet
couldn't defend.
Anyway, the Mythbusters are quartered in the Bay Area (my
daughter got two seconds in a crowd scene recently).
>Betelgeuse, Yellowstone ... have we added "all the methane on the ocean floors
>suddenly decides to come up and visit us", or "asteroid strike in the ocean"?
Not recently, but both sound familiar. Actually the "methane on
the ocean floors" one sounds like a topic mentioned in a book I
have actually in my bookshelves on the Permian terminal event,
but I have two on that topic and I don't feel like getting up
to see which one.
Dorothy J Heydt
John F. Eldredge <jo...@jfeldredge.com> wrote:
>
>Of course, world-wide agricultural production will be down noticeably for
>at least a year or so afterwards. The eruption of Mount Tambora in 1815
>kicked up enough dust to produce "The Year Without a Summer" in 1816.
>Most of the northern hemisphere had crop failures; I haven't seen much
>discussion of how much effect there was on the southern hemisphere.
Well, but there's another joker in the deck here. (a) there's
more land in the northern hemisphere than in the southern; (2)
worldwide communication in 1815 was not all that good, and the
southern hemisphere could have had seriously nasty effects and
the papers in the northern hemisphere never got around to hearing
about it, let alone mentioning it.
.... Pause to see if I can possibly find my copy of _Volcano
Weather_ ...
Found it. By Henry and Elizabeth Stommel, Newport RI: Seven Seas
Press, 1983. "Southern hemisphere" does not appear in the Index;
let me see if I can find anything with a quick skim.
Nope. The data concentrate on disastrous effects in New England
and in Europe (including secondary effects such as revved-up
Westward Movement in the US and cholera breakouts).
There is one (1) paragraph about reported effects from China and
Japan, which since there's only one of it I shall transcribe.
"In Japan, where meticulous records of rice yields were kept,
1816 does not appear to have been exceptional. In China the
summer, though cold, was not extraordinarily so. Keeping weather
journals was as common amongst the Chinese leisure class as
bird-watching is among us today. Chinese meteorological records
of the time are therefore very num,erous, but unfortunately do
not include thermometer readings and hence it is impossible to
make firm comparisons of the summer of 1816 with other summers.
It would appear, however, that the truly exceptional characterof
1816 weather was limited to a small portion of northeastern
America, Canada and the extreme western parts of Europe."
End of paragraph, end of chapter.
Tambora, it turns out, is on Java, in present-day Indonesia. In
the absence of any other evidence except the above, indicating
the limited effect even in the northern hemisphere, we can assume
for the moment that the southern hemisphere didn't suffer much.
Ironically, Java is in the southern hemisphere, though just
barely, at 7 deg 30 min S. But the winds seem to've been blowing
north-, not southwestward at the time. In any case, they never
blow straight westward all the time (cf. Shute, _On the Beach_,
which Does Not Compute).
Hal tells me that the eruption of Krakatao, also on Java, was the
first such event to be reported upon worldwide. But then, that
was in 1883 and telegraphy provided almost-instantaneous
communication all over the planet.
Dorothy J Heydt
David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
>>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
>>> some miserable nursing home.
>>
>>I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
>>be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
>>maggoty and putrescent.
>
>That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
being Fed On Time.
Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
a human before the micro-organisms set in.
(Cf. Dunsany, "Two Bottles of Relish")
Lynn McGuire
> Dorothy J Heydt<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> The only place any subduction
>> is going on around here is in the Pacific Northwest (Washington,
>> Oregon, British Columbia), where the North American Plate is
>> sliding *over* what's left of the Juan de Fuca plate. That's why
>> you get all those lovely Cascade Mountains that occasionally blow up.
>
> ...suddenly I have a proposal for the Mythbusters episode to end all
> Mythbusters episodes. (Perhaps literally.)
>
>> As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
>> and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
>> risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
>> likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
>> lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
>
> It could be worse. ObSF: Moira J. Moore's _Hero_ series, where the magic-
> workers, in pairs, spend a good deal of time channelling energy away from
> various weather and nature occurrences that left to themselves would wreak
> havoc on various locales. Also, to a more extreme extent, Rachel Caine's
> _Weather Warden_ series, where our planet ACTIVELY wants to scrape humanity
> off its surface almost any way it can and (again) the magic-users spend nearly
> all their time and effort preventing that.
>
> Betelgeuse, Yellowstone ... have we added "all the methane on the ocean floors
> suddenly decides to come up and visit us", or "asteroid strike in the ocean"?
>
> Dave
All the methane melting and vaporizing on the ocean bottom is not
gonna happen. Under that much pressure, methane forms a stable
solid hydrate with water at about 68 F. The ocean bottom is 40 F
or so. If we get that much temperature change on the ocean bottom
then Katie bar the door because it is going to be REAL hot up here.
Unless we get a new volcano chain in the bottom of the Gulf of
Mexico. Sounds like a apocalyptic story ...
Lynn
Lynn McGuire
> In article<slrnijsvs...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
> David DeLaney<d...@vic.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bannister<rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>> On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
>>>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
>>>> some miserable nursing home.
>>>
>>> I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
>>> be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
>>> maggoty and putrescent.
>>
>> That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
>
> Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
> being Fed On Time.
>
> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
>
> (Cf. Dunsany, "Two Bottles of Relish")
I don't know. I've got one tabby who won't touch anything but
little friskies and mice (don't ask about the mice). On the
other hand, the part Siamese guy was eating oatmeal with me this
morning. He'll eat anything but fruit. Get about 50 of him
and they'll clean up a few bodies.
Lynn
Michael A. Terrell
Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> In article <slrnijsvs...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
> >Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >>On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
> >>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
> >>> some miserable nursing home.
> >>
> >>I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
> >>be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
> >>maggoty and putrescent.
> >
> >That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
>
> Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
> being Fed On Time.
>
> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
--
You can't fix stupid. You can't even put a band-aid on it, because it's
Teflon coated.
Dorothy J Heydt
Michael Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <LFJy8...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J
>Heydt) writes:
>
>Each, as they say, to their own dangers. It's probably just because
>it's what I'm used to, but I'll take tornadoes over hurricanes. Most
>of the time, a tornado just blasts through, and half an hour later
>your house either is or is not matchsticks. Hurricanes seemingly
>linger on forever.
>
>> (Actually I'd
>>move away from Florida and the Laurientian shield too;
>
>The Laurentian Shield has to be about the safest place on Earth.
Tectonically, yes, but see below.
>Why would you move away from it?
Well, as previously mentioned, heavy-duty cold snowy winters.
I've never lived under such conditions -- to me, snow is
something which, if you want to experience it, you pack everybody
into the car, make sure you've got chains in the trunk, and head
east for four hours or so. And then you let the little kid(s)
romp in the snow for an hour or two and then you go home. If
the Swami told me, when the Big One hits, you will die," I would say,
"OK, I'll die. Gotta happen sometime."
As to the Laurentian shield, yes, it is the solidest chunk of
rock we've got on the planet. But the flip side of that is that
if there were an earthquake on it (unlikely as that is) or near
it (think New Madrid Fault suddenly going active again), any
seismic vibration that traveled even to the edge of the Shield
would travel all the way across it with very little diminution.
Earthquakes in California are fairly local, even the Big Ones.
That's because the West Coast has been seismically active for so
long that it's all broken up into shards, with big faults and
little faults separating them. The Pretty Big One on the Loma
Prieta Fault in 1989 did massive damage in Santa Cruz, soggy
parts of San Francisco, and here and there up and down the
Peninsula. Over in the East Bay where I was living, however, it
was just a big noticeable shake. Within my immediate experience
at the time:
* the grocery store that I was just leaving shook and scared a
lot of people into running outside;
* the same store had its big plate-glass window cracked;
* a lot of items probably fell off the shelves, though I didn't
go outside to look;
* the grocery store building DID NOT FALL DOWN, although it was
made of unreinforced brick!!!!!
When I got home, I learned:
* the cats had gotten very nervous, and my son's big tomcat,
who'd been sitting on his lap, dug in with all his claws (ouch);
* My iron, which had been sitting on the ironing board, fell off
into a basket of laundry on the floor (fortunately it wasn't
turned on).
So we went outside to see what else had happened. No sign of
anything. Except far to the southwest there was a pillar of
black smoke in the sky, so we thought we'd go investigate, only
it wasn't close by (we found out later it was clear on the other
side of Berkeley, maybe five miles: something had caught fire at
an auto repair shop) and we heard someone calling out to someone
else, "The radio says the Bay Bridge has fallen!" Wow, we said,
let's go home and turn on the television. Thus we learned that
*one* segment of the upper roadbed of the Bridge had fallen, and
damage reports were coming in from Santa Cruz and San Francisco.
That's all we saw in Albany, maybe sixty miles from the epicenter
near Santa Cruz. But there were a couple of mini-faults between
us and it, which drained off a lot of the energy. The effects of
the New Madrid earthquakes in 1811 and -12 were much stronger and
more widespread, because that part of the North American
continent was more cohesive at that point and there were fewer
little faults to take up the slack. Take a look at this picture
comparing the damage from the Northridge quake of 1994 and the
New Madrid:
http://www.lampholderpub.com/NewMadrid1895EarthquakeMap.gif
It would take me more data than I've got to make a good
comparison of the degree of damage in Albany from the Loma
Prieta compared to that in, say, Boston from the New Madrid.
I'd rate the former at about a Modified Mercalli V; the latter
at about a III (church bells rang).
By the way, the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale measures, not
the power released by the quake at its epicenter (that's the
Richter scale) but the damage and human reactions experienced at
a given distance from the epicenter. It rages from "I. Not felt
except by a very few" to "XII. Damage total .... Objects are
thrown into the air." Here's a link to the USGS on the subject.
http://earthquake.usgs.gov/learn/topics/mercalli.php
One of the reasons the damage from the New Madrid wasn't much
greater is that a lot of the affected area was so sparsely
settled at the time. Think what a similar quake from that or a
nearby fault would do now.
That's one of the reasons one of the places I would *never* be
willing to live is Chicago and environs. We drove through
suburban Illinois once on our way to a con in Chicago and I just
about had heart attacks all the way there. House after house
after house of unreinforced brick. Shudder. Even a moderate
earthquake in that region will kill you, because all the bricks
will collapse on you. Mortar has no tensile strength.
Generally speaking, if there's an earthquake AND YOU'RE IN AN
UNREINFORCED BRICK BUILDING, get out fast if you can. If you
can't, get under a sturdy table if you can. If you can't,
requiescas in pace. If you're NOT in an unreinforced brick
building, get under a table or desk and wait. The building (say,
a frame house not bolted to its foundation) will probably be
totaled, but you won't be seriously hurt if you wait to go
outside till the shaking has stopped. If you run outside, you're
likely to be hit on the head by something falling from the roof
(our lovely quaint traditional terra-cotta Spanish roof tiles,
e.g.; if I bought such a house I'd get the roof replaced before
moving in).
And that's quite enough from me on earthquake safety for one
post.
Dorothy J Heydt
Um, there's always the mid-Atlantic ridge, though it seems to be
doing things comparable to the Parkfield Creep than to the Really Big
Ones.
http://europa.agu.org/?uri=/journals/jb/JB083iB11p05415.xml&view=article
Note that it appears to be one of the things that happened during
the Permian terminal event: the shaking-up of the Siberian traps was
sufficient to let a whole load of methane loose, and practically
all life died. Interestingly enough, the Lystrosaurus, a
mammal-like reptile that was one of the very few macroscopic
survivors, appears to have been a high-altitude denizen that was
used to low oxygen levels.
But you'd need a comparably energetic event to power a similar
release nowadays.
Dorothy J Heydt
Who are willing to eat carrion. Who are willing to refrain from
eating you until after you are dead and the food bowl is empty.
Dogs might, *for the purpose under discussion*, be a better choice,
particularly if they've got a high proportion of jackal to wolf
blood in them.
Robert Bannister
> As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
> and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
> risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
> likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
> lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
>
"Now, let me get this straight", said the alien. "You and your fellow
Earthlings live on bits of solidified rock floating on top of a mass of
molten magma, and you think our way of living inside a sun is dangerous?"
--
Rob Bannister
Walter Bushell
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> In article <slrnijsvs...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
> >Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
> >>On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
> >>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
> >>> some miserable nursing home.
> >>
> >>I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
> >>be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
> >>maggoty and putrescent.
> >
> >That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
>
> Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
> being Fed On Time.
>
> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
>
> (Cf. Dunsany, "Two Bottles of Relish")
A dog could work.
Lynn McGuire
William December Starr
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> said:
> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>
>> As I said elsethread, we live on a wild planet, not a tame one,
>> and there are no safe places. The best you can do is choose the
>> risk that scares you the least and move to where that's the
>> likeliest risk. And hope that Yellowstone *doesn't* go in your
>> lifetime, because that will affect the whole damn planet.
>
> Scatter you descendants all over the place.
That may be great for your genes, but I don't see how it'll do _you_
much good. Unless you expect to survive the initial catastrophe and
then be carried through the ensuing Troubled Times by your grateful
blood-kin, anyway.
-- wds
Dorothy J Heydt
"Gentlebeing, it would be dangerous to *us*. In fact, it would
be fatal to us, long before we got near the sun. Our life forms
are adapted to living either on the relatively dry land masses,
or under one of the large bodies of water we have so many of, and
in fact, we have a few that live in stranger places, as, *inside*
rocks. If you have time, I would be honored to explain to you in
general (for I am not an expert) how we can live on a planet in
this temperature zone, and perhaps you can explain to me how you
can live inside a sun. To begin with, our bodies are made up
almost entirely of the elements Carbon, Oxygen, Nitrogen, and
Hydrogen; and the majority of our body mass -- between 60 and 75
percent -- consists of water. (That's dihydrogen monoxide.)
There's a lot of it on the planetary surface, and ....."
I could go on for hours, and I'm *not* an expert.
Dorothy J Heydt
Yes, or several. (I'm thinking just of body mass of prey vs. that
of predator, and I'm not a dog expert.)
David Loewe, Jr.
<mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>> >Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>> >>On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
>> >>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
>> >>> some miserable nursing home.
>> >>
>> >>I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
>> >>be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
>> >>maggoty and putrescent.
>> >
>> >That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
>>
>> Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
>> being Fed On Time.
>>
>> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
>> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
>> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
> Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
Like this one
http://home.mindspring.com/~dloewe/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/.pond/tiger.jpg.w180h216.jpg
?
He actually bit me (yes, that is me - 80 pounds and a lot of gray ago)
as this photograph was taken.
--
"My doctor told me to stop having intimate dinners for four.
Unless there are three other people."
- Orson Welles
William December Starr
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> said:
> Could be better than hanging on with Alzheimer's and Parkinson's
> in a death watch camp for a decade or two.
>
> My father was contemplating taking his boat out to sea when he got
> too old. But he stated the problem is that you have to do it while
> you still can and that means you probably still have some quality
> of life.
I vaguely recall a science fiction short story about a retired
software genius who, knowing that his brain was degrading, built a
simulation of himself, running on his home computer, to make the
"it's time to pull the trigger" decision for him when he reached the
point -- which he would by then be incapable of recognizing and
comprehending -- that his life was no longer worth living.
The story ended with the emulation calling the guy's friend to come
over and (1) call the police to take care of the body and (2) shut
down the emulation which, having accomplished its purpose, didn't
want to live (or "live," take your pick) anymore.
-- wds
Walter Bushell
In extremis, save what you can. Personal identity seems to be a
confabulation set up to insure passage of genes anyway.
Gene Wirchenko
Starr) wrote:
[snip]
>I vaguely recall a science fiction short story about a retired
>software genius who, knowing that his brain was degrading, built a
>simulation of himself, running on his home computer, to make the
>"it's time to pull the trigger" decision for him when he reached the
>point -- which he would by then be incapable of recognizing and
>comprehending -- that his life was no longer worth living.
>
>The story ended with the emulation calling the guy's friend to come
>over and (1) call the police to take care of the body and (2) shut
>down the emulation which, having accomplished its purpose, didn't
>want to live (or "live," take your pick) anymore.
And neatly tying this up with another thread, if the AI did want
to live, that is how the AI could escape.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Gene Wirchenko
Heydt) wrote:
>In article <OeCdna7BB_iSxKLQ...@earthlink.com>,
>Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
[snip]
>> Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
>
>Who are willing to eat carrion. Who are willing to refrain from
>eating you until after you are dead and the food bowl is empty.
>Dogs might, *for the purpose under discussion*, be a better choice,
>particularly if they've got a high proportion of jackal to wolf
>blood in them.
Or who are willing to help the food along. (Think cat playing
with mouse.) Remember when you forgot to feed Fluffy on time? Fluffy
says that it is payback time.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
Dimensional Traveler
> In article<slrnijsvq...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
> David DeLaney<d...@vic.com> wrote:
>> Dorothy J Heydt<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>>> The only place any subduction
>>> is going on around here is in the Pacific Northwest (Washington,
>>> Oregon, British Columbia), where the North American Plate is
>>> sliding *over* what's left of the Juan de Fuca plate. That's why
>>> you get all those lovely Cascade Mountains that occasionally blow up.
>>
>> ...suddenly I have a proposal for the Mythbusters episode to end all
>> Mythbusters episodes. (Perhaps literally.)
>
> You would have to evacuate all the Pacific Coast cities first, or
> else you'd have lawsuits that all the lawyers on the planet
> couldn't defend.
>
> Anyway, the Mythbusters are quartered in the Bay Area (my
> daughter got two seconds in a crowd scene recently).
>
Discovery has been forced to allow them to travel so they've been doing
more and more out of state myths.
--
"There's something that doesn't make sense. Let's go and poke it with a
stick."
ErictheTolle
> We have also had tremendous disasters that have been important to
> humans. I'm not thinking of the name of one that was huge in India
> in prehistoric times.
The British East India Company?
Eric Tolle
ErictheTolle
wrote:
> In article <LFJz2v.1...@kithrup.com>, djhe...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>
>
>
> >In article <33ee1b74-cc7a-4cd0-9eeb-ba47426c8...@d23g2000prj.googlegroups.com>,
> Chris <chris.linthomp...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> I don't think that Yellowstone or La Palma are planet-killers. It may
> >>> be prudent not to live /on/ either one.
>
> >>...or within about 2000 miles of them...in which case you're screwed
> >>from the tsunami when the Azores undersea cliff lets go, or when most
> >>of the west coast slides into the sea.
> >>Or, if you're in OR or WA,
> >>you'll just starve or freeze when Yellowstone lets go, because the
> >>crops will fail.
>
> >Mmmmmm, maybe. Don't forget that the general trend of air
> >currents on this planet (the Jet Stream, et cetera) is
> >west-to-east. So while a caldera explosion in Yellowstone would
> >cause serious ecological trouble all over the planet, the states
> >downwind of Wyoming -- the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota,
> >Iowa, and I have no clue how much further east, north, and south --
> >will get a lot more ashfall than the states west and upwind of
>
> Based upon the diagrams of previous events shown at:
> <http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm>,
> you've about nailed the eastern extent. Didn't even hit the
> Twin Cities.
Hey and the Western edge of the ashfall doesn't seem to come near the
SF Bay Area. So while I might wish that the ash would bury Texas 12
ft. deep if it could, I think it's OK to let 'er rip.
Eric TOlle
ErictheTolle
> On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
>
>
> >> It is more likely that the Yellowstone caldera will erupt - with a
> >> much bigger effect on life on Earth.
>
> > If you start on that I'll need to cover my ears and say "NA NA NA NA
> > NA..." really loud.
>
> > I try to look on the bright side. It's more likely that I'll die in
> > an automobile accident or have heart failure or be in a 7-11 that's
> > getting robbed and get hit by a richochet.
>
> > The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
> > some miserable nursing home.
>
> I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
> be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
> maggoty and putrescent.
Well you see, that's why you want to keep cats. To clean up after you.
Eric Tolle
Norm D. Plumber
>In article <0h8tj6t06n6v862ub...@4ax.com>,
> "Norm D. Plumber" <nom-de...@non.com> wrote:
>
>> Note to self: Get tattoo saying "if you don't remember this tattoo go
>> play on the freeway *now*".
>
>Now that would be traumatic at best for the person who was driving the
>car that hit you.
And once he did, it would no longer be my problem, right? Suicide is
not a considerate act. Considerate acts entail one's remaining a
productive contributor to society. The two are somewhat in conflict.
--
"the source of prosperity is disposable income" -Epicromulus
Norm D. Plumber
David DeLaney
And it might be possible to arrange things with that episode so that
afterwards there were a lot fewer lawyers on the planet, too...
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
David DeLaney
>Walter Bushell wrote:
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
>>> David DeLaney<d...@vic.com> wrote:
>>>> Robert Bannister<rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 24/01/11 5:37 PM, Norm D. Plumber wrote:
>>>>>> The most likely thing is that I'll live to be really old and stuck in
>>>>>> some miserable nursing home.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm more worried that I won't be able to afford a nursing home and I'll
>>>>> be one of those old people found by accident several weeks after death,
>>>>> maggoty and putrescent.
>>>>
>>>> That's easy to avoid. Get a couple of cats.
>>>
>>> Yes; a couple of Siamese with Loud Voices who are accustomed to
>>> being Fed On Time.
>>>
>>> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
>>> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
>>> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
>>>
>>> (Cf. Dunsany, "Two Bottles of Relish")
>>
>> A dog could work.
Cats would take longer, but as I understand things would still eventually
chow down upon you. (Especially if their other food was where they really
couldn't get at it.)
>Dogs in Elk:
> http://www.webtree.ca/tree/keeper/dogs_in_elk.htm
> http://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/dogsinelk.html
ObThreadDrift: Dog eating sweet potato, from 2007 -
http://littera-abactor.livejournal.com/7748.html
Dave "warning, laughter amount may prove unsafe for work" DeLaney
Thomas Womack
ErictheTolle <eet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Jan 24, 6:33=A0pm, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>> We have also had tremendous disasters that have been important to
>> in prehistoric times.
I imagine you're thinking of Toba, which is the most recent really big
volcanic eruption - occurred in Indonesia around 70k years ago,
deposited fifteen centimetres of ash over all of South Asia, and it's
not clear whether it's coincidence that it occurred just before the
most recent big radiation of humans out of Africa.
Tom
Michael Stemper
>In article <ihn6r3$vl6$5...@news.eternal-september.org>, Michael Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>currents on this planet (the Jet Stream, et cetera) is
>>>west-to-east. So while a caldera explosion in Yellowstone would
>>>cause serious ecological trouble all over the planet, the states
>>>downwind of Wyoming -- the Dakotas, Nebraska, Kansas, Minnesota,
>>>Iowa, and I have no clue how much further east, north, and south --
>>>will get a lot more ashfall than the states west and upwind of
>>
>>Based upon the diagrams of previous events shown at:
>><http://www.earthmountainview.com/yellowstone/yellowstone.htm>,
>>you've about nailed the eastern extent. Didn't even hit the
>>Twin Cities.
>
>ITYM "wouldn't have hit the Twin Cities, had they been there at
>the time."
Or "didn't hit where the Twin Cities were later built".
>("Hm, Sodom and Gomorrah were in an active tectonic zone......")
After having spent a third of a century here, I can assure you that
the Twin Cities are about as far (in a Second Foundation sense) from
Sodom and Gomorrah as you can get. _A Prairie Home Companion_ is really
a documentary.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
A preposition is something that you should never end a sentence with.
Walter Bushell
mste...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
> After having spent a third of a century here, I can assure you that
> the Twin Cities are about as far (in a Second Foundation sense) from
> Sodom and Gomorrah as you can get. _A Prairie Home Companion_ is really
> a documentary.
You mean Sodom and Gomorrah are cleverly hidden in the Twin Cities?
Ah, too bad that was retconed away.
Remus Shepherd
> >> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
> >> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
> >> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
> >
> > Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
> Who are willing to eat carrion. Who are willing to refrain from
> eating you until after you are dead and the food bowl is empty.
> Dogs might, *for the purpose under discussion*, be a better choice,
> particularly if they've got a high proportion of jackal to wolf
> blood in them.
I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
wait one day.
True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat
owners. :)
... ...
Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com>
New Webcomic: Genocide Man http://www.genocideman.com/
Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass slaughter can be hilarious.
Walter Bushell
Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com> wrote:
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
> without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
> wait one day.
>
> True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat
> owners. :)
CSI, now that's an authority figure to conjure with.
James Nicoll
>> Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
>> >> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
>> >> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
>> >
>> > Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
>
>> Who are willing to eat carrion. Who are willing to refrain from
>> eating you until after you are dead and the food bowl is empty.
>> Dogs might, *for the purpose under discussion*, be a better choice,
>> particularly if they've got a high proportion of jackal to wolf
>> blood in them.
>
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
>without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
>wait one day.
If you're lucky. My cats are mostly ex-street cats and as I once said
before, many people worry about dying and being eaten by their cats; I
just hope it happens in that order.
My mother's cat just hid under the bathroom sink when my mother died
and she wasn't found for some time (we're not a frequent visits family).
If I recall the timing, the terrified cat was under there for about a week
before I suddenly remembered Lorna had had a cat. I believe the cat was
given to the tenant (who was away on holidays when Lorna died; one
of the reasons finding her was delayed).
--
http://www.livejournal.com/users/james_nicoll
http://www.cafepress.com/jdnicoll (For all your "The problem with
defending the English language [...]" T-shirt, cup and tote-bag needs)
Wayne Throop
: I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
: without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
: wait one day.
:
: True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat owners.
: :)
Why would you want to throw things in the face of cat owners?
Is this equal opportunity throwing? How about, "in the usual case,
dogs take a week of constant correction before they can be taught not
to crap on the rug. Cats take less than a day". Well. Unless they're
mad at you.
( I've had folks worry about "litter training" a cat. IME, you
show a kitten that's got its eyes open a litter box... and
they're trained. Pretty much. )
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
erilar
Mine seems to want to eat anything. . .
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
Michael Stemper
>In article <ihn6c1$vl6$4...@news.eternal-september.org>, Michael Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>In article <LFJy8...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>>> (Actually I'd
>>>move away from Florida and the Laurientian shield too;
>>
>>The Laurentian Shield has to be about the safest place on Earth.
>
>Tectonically, yes, but see below.
>
>>Why would you move away from it?
>
>Well, as previously mentioned, heavy-duty cold snowy winters.
Ah, right. Never think about them. (Until it gets down towards
20 below. Then, I try not to think about them.)
>As to the Laurentian shield, yes, it is the solidest chunk of
>rock we've got on the planet. But the flip side of that is that
>if there were an earthquake on it (unlikely as that is) or near
>Earthquakes in California are fairly local, even the Big Ones.
>That's because the West Coast has been seismically active for so
>long that it's all broken up into shards, with big faults and
>little faults separating them.
I never knew that.
>little faults separating them. The Pretty Big One on the Loma
>Prieta Fault in 1989 did massive damage in Santa Cruz,
>Peninsula. Over in the East Bay where I was living, however, it
>was just a big noticeable shake. Within my immediate experience
>at the time:
>* the grocery store building DID NOT FALL DOWN, although it was
> made of unreinforced brick!!!!!
>That's one of the reasons one of the places I would *never* be
>willing to live is Chicago and environs. We drove through
>suburban Illinois once on our way to a con in Chicago and I just
>about had heart attacks all the way there. House after house
>after house of unreinforced brick. Shudder. Even a moderate
>earthquake in that region will kill you, because all the bricks
>will collapse on you. Mortar has no tensile strength.
Except, of course, when they don't -- such as the experience that
you just described.
I wouldn't know, by looking at a house, how to tell whether or
not its bricks were reinforced. But, there's very little brick
construction where I have lived. (I left the Chicago area in
1960, and didn't think too much about construction techniques
as a six-year-old.)
>Generally speaking, if there's an earthquake AND YOU'RE IN AN
>UNREINFORCED BRICK BUILDING, get out fast if you can. If you
>can't, get under a sturdy table if you can. If you can't,
>requiescas in pace. If you're NOT in an unreinforced brick
>building, get under a table or desk and wait. The building (say,
>a frame house not bolted to its foundation)
Why wouldn't it be bolted to its foundation? I took an architecture
class in 1971, and bolting the frame to the foundation was taken as
a given, not a design choice.
>a frame house not bolted to its foundation) will probably be
>totaled, but you won't be seriously hurt if you wait to go
>outside till the shaking has stopped.
ObSFW: "Dog Star", by Arthur C. Clarke.
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
Economists have correctly predicted seven of the last three recessions.
Michael Stemper
>In article <ihp8so$10n$2...@news.eternal-september.org>, mste...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
>> After having spent a third of a century here, I can assure you that
>> the Twin Cities are about as far (in a Second Foundation sense) from
>> Sodom and Gomorrah as you can get. _A Prairie Home Companion_ is really
>> a documentary.
>
>You mean Sodom and Gomorrah are cleverly hidden in the Twin Cities?
>
>Ah, too bad that was retconed away.
When something believed in Chapter n is revealed to be incorrect in
Chapter n+1, I have trouble calling it a "ret-con".
--
Michael F. Stemper
#include <Standard_Disclaimer>
If this is our corporate opinion, you will be billed for it.
Dorothy J Heydt
ErictheTolle <eet...@gmail.com> wrote:
The Deccan Traps?
Dorothy J Heydt
>> Michael A. Terrell <mike.t...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >> Or do you mean the cats would eat you before the maggots got the
>> >> chance? I think it would take more than a couple of cats to consume
>> >> a human before the micro-organisms set in.
>> >
>> > Then you need bigger and hungrier cats. ;-)
>
>> Who are willing to eat carrion. Who are willing to refrain from
>> eating you until after you are dead and the food bowl is empty.
>> Dogs might, *for the purpose under discussion*, be a better choice,
>> particularly if they've got a high proportion of jackal to wolf
>> blood in them.
>
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
>without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
>wait one day.
>
> True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat
>owners. :)
It's not surprising. Dogs are social animals; their social unit
is the pack. There's a book out just recently, _Pack of Two_
about the human-dog relationship. But a cat is an individual who
will not obey you implicitly because you are her master; she'll
size you up and decide to become your friend, if she thinks
you're worthy of it. After that, she may become very fond of
you; cf. Colette's story "The Cat".
Dorothy J Heydt
Michael Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>* the grocery store building DID NOT FALL DOWN, although it was
>> made of unreinforced brick!!!!!
>
>>That's one of the reasons one of the places I would *never* be
>>willing to live is Chicago and environs. We drove through
>>suburban Illinois once on our way to a con in Chicago and I just
>>about had heart attacks all the way there. House after house
>>after house of unreinforced brick. Shudder. Even a moderate
>>earthquake in that region will kill you, because all the bricks
>>will collapse on you. Mortar has no tensile strength.
>
>Except, of course, when they don't -- such as the experience that
>you just described.
What we got in Albany was, as I said upthread, about a Mercalli
V. Though this page seems to have considered it a VI.
http://www.thetech.org/exhibits_events/online/quakes/grams/mercalli.html
Note that just like our microclimates, which can vary from block to
block, our seismic effects can vary according to itsy-bitsy
microfaults, many of which we don't even know about. Over the
East Bay hills into Orinda, say -- with the far from itsy-bitsy
and well overdue Hayward fault in the way -- I don't think they
felt anything at all, though that's a guess because I can't find
any data online. (An announcement of a meeting discussing the LP
quake, two years later, in a hall in Orinda doesn't count.)
>I wouldn't know, by looking at a house, how to tell whether or
>not its bricks were reinforced.
Ah. It isn't the individual bricks that are reinforced, but the
whole structure. The commonest way is to drill holes and run tie-rods
through the walls, every couple of feet, and the way you can tell
it's been done is that there are little diamond-shaped (really,
square and set diagonally) metal plates, maybe three inches
across, set every few feet into the wall (you can see this on the
outside) each with a big bolt in the middle of it.
Or, the entire building can be criss-crossed with a BIG lattice
of reinforcing bars, not infrequently consisting of I-beams welded
together, but you usually won't see these on a multi-story brick
building; for one of those, either (a) you just tear it down and
build something safer, or (b) it already fell down in the last
Pretty Big One. I used to work in a building in Berkeley that
was reinforced in that way (they put the reinforcement up around
it while we were working in it!). It was not brick but the
standard reinforced concrete and plaster finishing and stuff, and
had been built up to earthquake safety standards *at the time.*
Later, it was decided that wasn't good enough.
> But, there's very little brick
>construction where I have lived.
This is good. Where do you live? Somewhere in central North
America, I assume?
(I left the Chicago area in
>1960, and didn't think too much about construction techniques
>as a six-year-old.)
>
>>Generally speaking, if there's an earthquake AND YOU'RE IN AN
>>UNREINFORCED BRICK BUILDING, get out fast if you can. If you
>>can't, get under a sturdy table if you can. If you can't,
>>requiescas in pace. If you're NOT in an unreinforced brick
>>building, get under a table or desk and wait. The building (say,
>>a frame house not bolted to its foundation)
>
>Why wouldn't it be bolted to its foundation? I took an architecture
>class in 1971, and bolting the frame to the foundation was taken as
>a given, not a design choice.
Yes, but that was in 1971. It's a given now because it's
required. Where did you take the course? Buildings built in
1900, or 1930, or even 1950 aren't bolted down because the code
had not yet been made tough enough to require it and the builders
didn't want to do the extra work. Nowadays, if you want to sell
one of these houses, you have to provide a statement that the
bolting-down has been done, or, if it hasn't, hire it done. There
are many companies in the Bay Area that specialize in retrofitting
to current (or even better than current, say, "We predict that
this will be required by code in about twenty years") standards.
>
>>a frame house not bolted to its foundation) will probably be
>>totaled, but you won't be seriously hurt if you wait to go
>>outside till the shaking has stopped.
--
Dorothy J Heydt
Sebastian was older than that -- about a month -- when we put a
small litterbox in his nest box. (Feral orphans.) He
*immediately* went over and used it for its intended purpose. And
Sebastian was brain-damaged. His sister Viola, who's
neurologically normal so far as we can tell, took the whole day
to get the idea.
James Nicoll
>ErictheTolle <eet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>On Jan 24, 6:33 pm, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>>> We have also had tremendous disasters that have been important to
>>> humans. I'm not thinking of the name of one that was huge in India
>>> in prehistoric times.
>>
>>The British East India Company?
>
>The Deccan Traps?
>
Dinosaurs over the edge of extinction but somewhat before humans as
well by tens of millions of years.
David DeLaney
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
>without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
>wait one day.
Square-cube law; (most) cats are smaller than (most) dogs, so need food sooner.
(Dogs just think they WANT it sooner.)
Dave
Dorothy J Heydt
Michael Stemper <michael...@gmail.com> wrote:
>In article <proto-68871C....@news.panix.com>, Walter Bushell
><pr...@panix.com> writes:
>>In article <ihp8so$10n$2...@news.eternal-september.org>,
>mste...@walkabout.empros.com (Michael Stemper) wrote:
>
>>> After having spent a third of a century here, I can assure you that
>>> the Twin Cities are about as far (in a Second Foundation sense) from
>>> Sodom and Gomorrah as you can get. _A Prairie Home Companion_ is really
>>> a documentary.
>>
>>You mean Sodom and Gomorrah are cleverly hidden in the Twin Cities?
>>
>>Ah, too bad that was retconed away.
>
>When something believed in Chapter n is revealed to be incorrect in
>Chapter n+1, I have trouble calling it a "ret-con".
Nope, to be a retcon it has to have been declared true by the
writers, who OUGHT TO KNOW. If a character declares something to
be true, and it turns out he was lying, or was mistaken, or had
misinterpreted something, that doesn't count.
That's why we keep trying to find _dicta_ on so many of these
annoying topics from the Foglios, who carefully don't give us
any.
trag
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
> without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner. Cats
> wait one day.
>
> True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat
> owners. :)
Yeah, but if you own a dog, that's it's own punishment as long as
you're both alive. And most likely even worse punishment for your
poor neighbors.
Of course, there's nothing wrong with a dog that cutting off its paws,
wiring its mouth shut and shoving a cork its butt won't fix.
trag
> ( I've had folks worry about "litter training" a cat. IME, you
> show a kitten that's got its eyes open a litter box... and
> they're trained. Pretty much. )
And if you give the cat its own door, you will never, ever need to
clean that litter box, because they'll always go outside.
Dorothy J Heydt
No. Now, that is not kind, and not even accurate. Some people
LIKE dogs. Some people even, for reasons that are dark to me,
dislike cats. Dogs have dog characteristics and cats have cat
characteristics and humans are variable enough that they prefer
one or the other. If we cat people feel that cats are superior
to dogs or that we are superior to dog people, that's just
snobbery that probably derives from insecurity.* It is, after
all, a huge egoboo that a cat is willing to live with you. Let
the dog people have their dogs and let's all be polite.
_____
*There's an article just posted in _Slate_ about snobbishness in
general, for whatever reason, begins as compensation for
insecurity. http://www.slate.com/id/2281876/
Dorothy J Heydt
Yes, and get run over or killed by a dog or a raccoon or another
cat or an ailurophobic human or .....
I'd rather clean the litter box.
erilar
Perhaps we should do that to you?????
erilar
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:
> Some people
> LIKE dogs. Some people even, for reasons that are dark to me,
> dislike cats. Dogs have dog characteristics and cats have cat
> characteristics and humans are variable enough that they prefer
> one or the other. If we cat people feel that cats are superior
> to dogs or that we are superior to dog people, that's just
> snobbery that probably derives from insecurity.* It is, after
> all, a huge egoboo that a cat is willing to live with you. Let
> the dog people have their dogs and let's all be polite.
Cat people are servants. Dog people are gods. Just ask the cats and the
dogs 8-) Actually, I like cats, too, as long as they belong to someone
else.
William December Starr
Remus Shepherd <re...@panix.com> said:
> I have heard -- I think on a CSI show -- that dogs wait for a week
> without being fed before they'll eat the corpse of their owner.
> Cats wait one day.
>
> True or not, it's a nice factoid to throw in the faces of cat
> owners. :)
What, that cats are more efficient than dogs?
-- wds
Dorothy J Heydt
Dogs have masters; cats have staff.
Dogs come when called; cats have answering machines and may get
back to you.
Cats can be very annoying at times, but I wouldn't want a dog. I
have nothing against dogs, but I don't want to live with anything
that has been bred to be a serf. Also that has to be taken
outside to eliminate, and then I have to pick it up in a plastic
bag and put it in the garbage Much better to have a critter that
eliminates neatly in an indoor location, and *then* I scoop it up in
a plastic bag and put it in the garbage.
Gene Wirchenko
Heydt) wrote:
[snip]
>That's why we keep trying to find _dicta_ on so many of these
>annoying topics from the Foglios, who carefully don't give us
>any.
Can you really trust anyone who has a silent letter in his name?
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko