ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags snakes

Reply
Old 6th April 2006, 11:30 PM   #41
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by LostAngeles View Post
The answer is still that snakes aren't found in broccoli, but on motherf***ing planes.
Yeah, but do they have friggin' laser beams attached to their friggin' heads?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 02:25 AM   #42
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
...snip...

Eyelids aren't eyelids because they can move, Steve.
I would agree with that however it appears that snakes do not have any of the structures that are associated at all with eye-lids.

What are you therefore referring to as a "fused eyelid" on a snake? They have a scale, which is transparent, I could find no sites that mention that a snakes eye covering is a fused eyelid structure.

Please supply the evidence for your claim that snakes have a "fused eyelid".
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:43 AM   #43
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,500
What I find questionable is the implication that because the original report includes the phrase "its beady eyes opened", the whole story is therefore suspect. (Apologies if that wasn't the intended implication of the OP.)

It doesn't seem to me to be at all unlikely that someone in that situation would imagine that the snake's eyes had opened, and "remember" this, when in fact the animal may have turned its head to face her or something like that. It hardly invalidates the entire tale.

What does cast huge doubt on the whole story is, as someone alredy pointed out, the phrase "according to the Sun".

Ooh, it couldn't be that Claus started this apparently pointless thread simply to gain the opportunity of making a statement about snakes (Steve Grenard's known hobby area of expertise) which was essentially wrong, but which was borderline arguable on the basis of special semantic pleading, just so as to provoke a fight with Steve? No, surely not, that's just CT paranoia....

But I did wonder why on earth the thread on this, until Claus referenced it so show that Steve was willing to engage him on a subject (just not on subjects dead and buried for two years, it seems), and some pennies suddenly started to go "clang".

No, paranoid delusions, I realise this....

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:44 AM   #44
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I would agree with that however it appears that snakes do not have any of the structures that are associated at all with eye-lids.
That is irrelevant to whether it is an eyelid or not. I have bones, but they move because of my muscles. That doesn't mean the bones aren't bones.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
What are you therefore referring to as a "fused eyelid" on a snake? They have a scale, which is transparent, I could find no sites that mention that a snakes eye covering is a fused eyelid structure.

Please supply the evidence for your claim that snakes have a "fused eyelid".
Quote:
Under this hypothesis, the fused, transparent eyelids of snakes are thought to have evolved to combat marine conditions (corneal water loss through osmosis), while the external ears were lost through disuse in an aquatic environment, ultimately leading to an animal similar in appearance to sea snakes of today.
SnakesWP
I also refer to my post #34. It's not the movement that makes it an eyelid. The eyelid is simply what covers the eye for protection.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:48 AM   #45
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
What I find questionable is the implication that because the original report includes the phrase "its beady eyes opened", the whole story is therefore suspect. (Apologies if that wasn't the intended implication of the OP.)
It does raise a question about the credibility of the person telling the story.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
It doesn't seem to me to be at all unlikely that someone in that situation would imagine that the snake's eyes had opened, and "remember" this, when in fact the animal may have turned its head to face her or something like that. It hardly invalidates the entire tale.

What does cast huge doubt on the whole story is, as someone alredy pointed out, the phrase "according to the Sun".
So, the Sun is generally to be disbelieved? Why is that?

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Ooh, it couldn't be that Claus started this apparently pointless thread simply to gain the opportunity of making a statement about snakes (Steve Grenard's known hobby area of expertise) which was essentially wrong, but which was borderline arguable on the basis of special semantic pleading, just so as to provoke a fight with Steve? No, surely not, that's just CT paranoia....

But I did wonder why on earth the thread on this, until Claus referenced it so show that Steve was willing to engage him on a subject (just not on subjects dead and buried for two years, it seems), and some pennies suddenly started to go "clang".

No, paranoid delusions, I realise this....
Yes, it is. I had no intention of engaging Steve with this thread. If I want to engage someone, I do it head on.

Anyway, Steve has plenty of threads waiting for him. Your imagination is running wild. No conspiracy here.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:48 AM   #46
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,399
[Rubs eyes] Do I see two grown men discussing, at length, whether whatever a snake has is to be termed "eyelids" or not?



Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:53 AM   #47
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post

...snip..


So, the Sun is generally to be disbelieved? Why is that?

...snip...
Because it has no reputation as being a "newspaper" that has high journalistic standards.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:54 AM   #48
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because it has no reputation as being a "newspaper" that has high journalistic standards.
Where are these standards defined?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:55 AM   #49
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Where are these standards defined?
http://www.pcc.org.uk/
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 04:11 AM   #50
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
That is irrelevant to whether it is an eyelid or not. I have bones, but they move because of my muscles. That doesn't mean the bones aren't bones.
Does not address my point i.e:

"... do not have any of the structures that are associated at all with eye-lids.."

Quote:
I also refer to my post #34. It's not the movement that makes it an eyelid. The eyelid is simply what covers the eye for protection.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary (SE) an eyelid is defined as:

" One of the lids or covers of the eye, distinguished as upper and lower; one of the movable folds of skin with which an animal covers or uncovers the eye at pleasure."

I see no structure in snakes that this can be applied to.

It looks as if the person who wrote the WikiPedia article did not know the actual definition of the word "eyelid".
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 04:26 AM   #51
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 39,019
Foot long? Meh! We have worms bigger than that.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 04:44 AM   #52
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,500
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
It does raise a question about the credibility of the person telling the story.
OK, someone says they were shocked by the discovery of a snake in a bag of vegetables. As part of their recounting of the tale, they include the phrase "its beady eyes opened". We know that snakes cannot close their eyes, therefore nobody could have seen a snake open its eyes.

So, is this strong evidence to suggest that the entire story is invented, that there was no snake, and possibly no bag of vegetables either? So compelling that it's worthy of a JREF thread all of its own?

Or is it not quite likely that the opening of the eyes bit was simply post hoc embellishment from someone who was extremely startled at the time of the event, and just imagined or assumed that she'd seen that? Or even that the Sun journalist (I use the term loosely) simply added that bit of embellishment off his own bat?

Why does this matter? Why are we even bothering?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:30 AM   #53
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Does not address my point i.e:

"... do not have any of the structures that are associated at all with eye-lids.."


According to the Oxford English Dictionary (SE) an eyelid is defined as:

" One of the lids or covers of the eye, distinguished as upper and lower; one of the movable folds of skin with which an animal covers or uncovers the eye at pleasure."

I see no structure in snakes that this can be applied to.

It looks as if the person who wrote the WikiPedia article did not know the actual definition of the word "eyelid".
It doesn't cover and protect the eye? Isn't that the function of an eyelid?

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
OK, someone says they were shocked by the discovery of a snake in a bag of vegetables. As part of their recounting of the tale, they include the phrase "its beady eyes opened". We know that snakes cannot close their eyes, therefore nobody could have seen a snake open its eyes.

So, is this strong evidence to suggest that the entire story is invented, that there was no snake, and possibly no bag of vegetables either? So compelling that it's worthy of a JREF thread all of its own?

Or is it not quite likely that the opening of the eyes bit was simply post hoc embellishment from someone who was extremely startled at the time of the event, and just imagined or assumed that she'd seen that? Or even that the Sun journalist (I use the term loosely) simply added that bit of embellishment off his own bat?
How much "embellishment" should we accept, then? This is a very good example of a story that gets publicity, but not all the pieces fit together. Something is amiss here.

Compare to the stories we hear from psychics - or people who go to psychics. Some of what they tell us is true, but not all of it. Something is also amiss. But why should we trust any of it, then?

It's akin to believers in Uri Geller dismissing evidence of him cheating: Oh, he isn't caught all the time, so there's no reason to doubt him in such cases. But this isn't so: It all has to fit. If there is a weak link in the chain, *clonk*.

Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Why does this matter? Why are we even bothering?
It's an example of the importance of being observant. A very good one, too.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:32 AM   #54
Kiless
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,041
I think it's a good example of why we shouldn't rely on news articles to support assertions (e.g the most recent 'eSkeptic' gave detailed breakdown and actual citation of the studies into methodological problems with prayer and healing rather than depending upon newspaper second-hand accounts of said studies). I might use this in English class...
Kiless is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:32 AM   #55
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
What, in these, makes Sun untrustworthy?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:36 AM   #56
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
It doesn't cover and protect the eye? Isn't that the function of an eyelid?

...snip...
That two things have the same function does not mean that they are the same.

No one has said that snakes do not have a protective covering over their eyes however given the accepted definition for "eyelid" snakes do not have eyelids.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:40 AM   #57
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
What, in these, makes Sun untrustworthy?
I stated *why* the Sun is not regarded in the UK as being a good source of information e.g. it does not have a good reputation for journalism, you asked who sets those standards and I have shown you one of the bodies that sets those standards (and that the Sun agrees to follow).

Beyond that if it is a matter of interest you I suggest you do some research on the matter.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 05:40 AM   #58
Kiless
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 6,041
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
What, in these, makes Sun untrustworthy?
Dunno. Reckon these boo... uh, regular features might tell me why this particular publication isn't that high on the Pulitzer Prize winning stakes.

And yeah, I know - you get it for the articles.... uh huh... just like Playboy... uh huh... probably has great Sci fi like them too... uh huh...
Kiless is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 12:28 PM   #59
LostAngeles
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,109
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Yeah, but do they have friggin' laser beams attached to their friggin' heads?
No. Unless, "snake," is Danish for, "shark."
LostAngeles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 12:48 PM   #60
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
That two things have the same function does not mean that they are the same.

No one has said that snakes do not have a protective covering over their eyes however given the accepted definition for "eyelid" snakes do not have eyelids.
That's merely semantics. Either an eyelid covers and protects the eye, or it doesn't.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I stated *why* the Sun is not regarded in the UK as being a good source of information e.g. it does not have a good reputation for journalism, you asked who sets those standards and I have shown you one of the bodies that sets those standards (and that the Sun agrees to follow).

Beyond that if it is a matter of interest you I suggest you do some research on the matter.
You were the one claiming that The Sun was untrustworthy due to these rules. It is up to you to demonstrate why.

Originally Posted by LostAngeles View Post
No. Unless, "snake," is Danish for, "shark."
You are not capable of learning Danish. You lack the necessary triple-tongue.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 12:55 PM   #61
LostAngeles
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 10,109
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
...
You are not capable of learning Danish. You lack the necessary triple-tongue.
You're just waiting for me or another skepchick to ask, "Evidence," aren't you?
LostAngeles is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 12:56 PM   #62
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by LostAngeles View Post
You're just waiting for me or another skepchick to ask, "Evidence," aren't you?
Busted.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 12:57 PM   #63
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
That's merely semantics. Either an eyelid covers and protects the eye, or it doesn't.
No it is you that is playing semantics. Given the definition of an eye lid it is incorrect to state that snakes have "fused eyelids". Snakes have a different structure that protects their eyes, some creatures have eyelids, some have brills.

Let me ask you a question that may help you understand why your statement was incorrect.

Do you have brills?

Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
You were the one claiming that The Sun was untrustworthy due to these rules. It is up to you to demonstrate why.

...snip...
No it isn't, I suggest you check what I actually posted.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 01:24 PM   #64
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
No it is you that is playing semantics. Given the definition of an eye lid it is incorrect to state that snakes have "fused eyelids". Snakes have a different structure that protects their eyes, some creatures have eyelids, some have brills.
"Brille". And what do they do? They cover and protect the eyes.

What do you call the two protruding extremities that you walk on? "Legs" or "drumsticks" or "members"? All are allowed by the dictionary.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Let me ask you a question that may help you understand why your statement was incorrect.

Do you have brills?
No. I don't even have an aquarium where they can swim. Yes, my tongue is firmly lodged in my cheek. (Look up "brills")

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
No it isn't, I suggest you check what I actually posted.
Sure:

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because it has no reputation as being a "newspaper" that has high journalistic standards.
You didn't claim that The Sun isn't trustworthy? What am I missing here?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 01:33 PM   #65
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
"Brille". And what do they do? They cover and protect the eyes.

What do you call the two protruding extremities that you walk on? "Legs" or "drumsticks" or "members"? All are allowed by the dictionary.



No. I don't even have an aquarium where they can swim. Yes, my tongue is firmly lodged in my cheek. (Look up "brills")
OK then I'll correct my spelling mistake and ask again:

Do you have brilles?

Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post

You didn't claim that The Sun isn't trustworthy? What am I missing here?
Nope I didn't claim that. You asked Rolfe:

"...So, the Sun is generally to be disbelieved? Why is that?..."

To which I replied with:

"...Because it has no reputation as being a "newspaper" that has high journalistic standards...."
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 01:49 PM   #66
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
OK then I'll correct my spelling mistake and ask again:

Do you have brilles?
I have protective covers of my eyes. Is there a difference?

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Nope I didn't claim that. You asked Rolfe:

"...So, the Sun is generally to be disbelieved? Why is that?..."

To which I replied with:

"...Because it has no reputation as being a "newspaper" that has high journalistic standards...."
Aha. So, what am I missing?

What do you call the two protruding extremities that you walk on? "Legs" or "drumsticks" or "members"? All are allowed by the dictionary.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 02:04 PM   #67
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Origin of the word "brille" (var: brill). Enjoy the photo in this link:

http://www.hmag.gla.ac.uk/John/berylspex.htm
SteveGrenard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 03:16 PM   #68
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,708
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Ergo, snakes have eyelids. Fused, sure. But eyelids nonetheless.
You realize that you just contradicted yourself, right? Since a brill is not "a thin fold of skin and muscle", but is, in fact, a modified scale. And scales are not skin, they are a completely different tissue made from keratin; and thus are more closely related to hair, fingernails, and hooves than they are to skin. And as previously stated, they're not fused, but are shed the same as any other scales.

But since you've never let facts get in the way of your pronouncements before, I certainly don't expect you to start now.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 04:59 PM   #69
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
You realize that you just contradicted yourself, right? Since a brill is not "a thin fold of skin and muscle", but is, in fact, a modified scale. And scales are not skin, they are a completely different tissue made from keratin; and thus are more closely related to hair, fingernails, and hooves than they are to skin. And as previously stated, they're not fused, but are shed the same as any other scales.

But since you've never let facts get in the way of your pronouncements before, I certainly don't expect you to start now.
Scales are the pattern or structual formation of the skin of reptiles and fish; scales are also found on the legs of birds and in one group of amphibians, wormlike animals known as caecilians. The boney scales of caecilians are reduced in size, and are under the skin instead of on it.

The brill of a snake is a scale but it is also the outer layer of skin, yes a layer of keratin that is called the ectoderm. It is shed periodically as a snake grows or if it is injured, it is shed as part of the healing process. A quick review of the subject online will indicate to you that the outer layer of the skin or scales is still called skin. The brill is unique and it is incorrect to call it an eyelid.

The brill is definitely not a thin layer of skin and muscle since it doesn't move. Nor does it fold, nor does it move except as part of periodic shedding when its sloughed off with the rest of the ectoderm.

Here's one site that describes the process of shedding also called ecdysis:

http://www.peteducation.com/article....articleid=1648

The brill or brille is not called an eyelid by any competent authority: zoology, anatomy and especially the branch of zoology called herpetology. Others have defined the term eyelid above and the structure covering a snake's eye does not fit that description. It has been called the brill or brille, the eyecap or eye scale and the spectacle. As also indicated above, the origin of the word brill or brille is that translates to spectacle.

Several people in commenting on the original story correctly surmised that snakes do not have eyelids.One individual disagreed or was cognitively dissonant on the subject after he was shown proof that it is incorrect to state that snakes have eyelids.

The newspaper whether a reliable source or not, allegedly quoted the person who accosted the snake. It may've been a reporter putting words in their mouth. I don't know. But snakes are an emotional subject with most people who have an inherent if unfounded fear (ophidophobia) of them. It is not surprising then to have someone blurt out that the snake opened its eyes and stared at me sort of thing. One would not expect a person unxpectedly finding a snake in a bag of produce to be anatomically correct in describing the encounter.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 7th April 2006 at 05:12 PM.
SteveGrenard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 06:33 PM   #70
trvlr2
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Sunny Florida
Posts: 832
My last bag of broccoli had air holes in it(the bag).
Cflarson will never admit wrong.
trvlr2 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2006, 07:28 PM   #71
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Here is a group of pictures of the European Horseshoe Whip Snake. The last one, of a young specimen (about to shed -- look at the eye) fits the description/colors described in the article.

http://www.herp.it/indexjs.htm?Speci...ColubHippo.htm
SteveGrenard is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 01:37 AM   #72
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
I have protective covers of my eyes. Is there a difference?
Please answer my question:

Do you have brilles?


Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Aha. So, what am I missing?
Please show were I claimed that "... The Sun isn't trustworthy?"

All I have done is answer your question - in doing so *I* did not and have not made any claims regarding the trustworthiness or not of the Sun.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 01:52 AM   #73
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Please answer my question:

Do you have brilles?
Already did: No, I have eyelids. That protects my eyes. So do brilles. Correct?

Now, please answer mine:

What do you call the two protruding extremities that you walk on? "Legs" or "drumsticks" or "members"? All are allowed by the dictionary.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Please show were I claimed that "... The Sun isn't trustworthy?"

All I have done is answer your question - in doing so *I* did not and have not made any claims regarding the trustworthiness or not of the Sun.
Sure you did: You dismiss the article because you say that The Sun hasn't a reputation for high journalistic standards. I'm asking what you base that on.
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 02:11 AM   #74
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 82,982
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Already did: No, I have eyelids. That protects my eyes. So do brilles. Correct?

Now, please answer mine:
I'm glad you have started to understand the difference.

Eyelids - in English and in biological terms is not a generic term for structures that protect the eye. Eyelids refer to certain types of eye protection and in this instance it has been shown by several people with reference to a wide range of sources that the snakes eye protector - brilles - are not in fact anything at all like eye lids, they are of an entirely different type of structure.

It is simply incorrect to refer to brilles as "fused eyelids" in either the English language or biological terms.

I understand that you have located one reference that supports your view however I should point out that Wikipedia is known (as a result of a recent study) to have a high level of factual errors. Given that it appears to be at odds with the other sources quoted in this thread it could seem you have located another factual error.

There really is nothing more I can add to the argument. I and others have put the evidence in front of you.




Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
What do you call the two protruding extremities that you walk on? "Legs" or "drumsticks" or "members"? All are allowed by the dictionary.
Legs.

Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post

Sure you did: You dismiss the article because you say that The Sun hasn't a reputation for high journalistic standards. I'm asking what you base that on.

Again please read the thread - *I* did not dismiss the Sun article.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 02:17 AM   #75
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Legs.
Why not drumsticks? Or members?

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Again please read the thread - *I* did not dismiss the Sun article.
You cast doubt on the article by referring to The Sun's reputation. What do you base it on?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 03:05 AM   #76
sat556
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 550
Come on Claus, prove some wrong and admit that you have been misled by the Wiki and are therefore miskaken.

Have you ever seen The Sun paper? If you haven't, I'll be happy to post you a copy so that you can find out for yourself first hand how truly awful it really is. It's the 'adult' equivalent of the Beano.
sat556 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 03:10 AM   #77
Medb
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Why not drumsticks? Or members?
Name a single animal that walks on drumsticks. Please.
Medb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 03:22 AM   #78
Kotatsu
Phthirapterist
 
Kotatsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Good Anvil
Posts: 2,311
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Congratulations. That is quite a find. Did you find it in produce or was it
in the ground?

Was it a Swedish national science magazine?
1. In the bottom material of a small brook. We deal mainly with aquatic oligochaetes. The brook rund through a valley stocked with bushes and whatnots imported from Japan and China, a part of the local botanical garden called the Rhododendron Valley. Upstream is the Japan Valley.

2. Ah, yes. "Fauna & Flora". It calls itself a "magazine for popular biology".
__________________
"It is not supposed to be funny or annoying or insightful, because it is neither; nor to convey or express any emotion or wit, because it doesn't; nor to be any kind of art, because it isn't; but merely to be repetitive. It is repetition for the sake of repetition; mindless, relentless, remorseless and -- ultimately -- redundant." K. Krishnamurthi, "The Seven Forms of Repetition", 1972.
Kotatsu is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 03:30 AM   #79
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by sat556 View Post
Come on Claus, prove some wrong and admit that you have been misled by the Wiki and are therefore miskaken.

Have you ever seen The Sun paper? If you haven't, I'll be happy to post you a copy so that you can find out for yourself first hand how truly awful it really is. It's the 'adult' equivalent of the Beano.
So, nothing The Sun says can be trusted?

Originally Posted by Medb View Post
Name a single animal that walks on drumsticks. Please.
Chickens.

All are allowed in the dictionary. Unless the dictionary is also wrong?
CFLarsen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th April 2006, 03:36 AM   #80
sat556
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 550
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
So, nothing The Sun says can be trusted?
That's not my personal opinion. However, I do feel they embellish a bit and that a lot of what they report needs to be taken with a pinch of salt. So I wouldn't buy it to start with.

Was that the correct answer anyway? The Sun is the mistake?
sat556 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:21 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.