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 8th April 2006, 03:59 AM   #81
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by sat556 View Post
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.
But that can be said for every newspaper in the world. What newspaper has never embellished even part of an article? I don't think we can find any.

Originally Posted by sat556 View Post
Was that the correct answer anyway? The Sun is the mistake?
Snakes don't open their eyes.
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, 04:56 AM   #82
Arkan_Wolfshade
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,154
I think the obvious flaw in the article that we are all missing is that broccoli and snakes are natural enemies. There is no way she could have found a live snake in the with the broccoli, as the broccoli would have eaten it long before it could have made it to her kitchen counter.
Arkan_Wolfshade 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, 04:56 AM   #83
Medb
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 113
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Chickens.

All are allowed in the dictionary. Unless the dictionary is also wrong?
Bzzt, wrong.

Quote:
drumˇstick P Pronunciation Key (drmstk)
n.
Music. A stick for beating a drum.
The lower part of the leg of a cooked fowl.
Maybe it's because English isn't your first language, but we don't call it a drumstick until it's dead and on our plates.

Not that any of that has to do with how wrong you are about the whole eyelid thing, I just thought I'd point that out.
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, 05:00 AM   #84
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Medb View Post
Bzzt, wrong.
"The lower part of the leg".

Originally Posted by Medb View Post
Maybe it's because English isn't your first language, but we don't call it a drumstick until it's dead and on our plates.
A leg is a leg is a leg.
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, 05:32 AM   #85
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
This is a very good example of a story that gets publicity, but not all the pieces fit together. Something is amiss here.
Thinking about this, I'm not sure I entirely agree. Obviously I don't wholly disagree! However, I've been working my way through that train-wreck of a thread entitled "Loose Change", about the Twin Towers attacks, and I see a bit of a parallel.

Much of the material which the CTers cling to consists of minor reporting discrepancies like this. Small inconsistencies, little points that for one reason or another don't quite add up. Pretty much all of the time there is a simple and non-sinister explanation for the discrepancy - misreporting, misremebering, misunderstanding, mixing up two events, that sort of thing. What they don't do is provide serious grounds to doubt the generally-accepted account of events on 11th September, and postulate a "globalist" conspiracy instead.

I think we need a bit of perspective here. Obviously, nobody should be taking any improbable story at face value. But equally obviously, a small reporting inconsistency is not necessarily sufficient grounds for a wholesale rejection of the entire tale.

So, in which category is this? The woman could not have seen the snake open its eyes. She says she did (though we don't know if she would stick to that story if challenged with a herpetology anatomy book). Is this enough to start declaring the entire story to be a complete fabrication? Or is it more likely that in the shock of the moment, the woman simply thought she saw a small detail she actually didn't see?

My own view is that knowing the story comes from the Sun is sufficient grounds for me to be taking it with a pinch of salt in the first place. The "opened its beady eyes" bit doesn't really add to that much, and in my mind would tend to reinforce my opinion of the quality of the journalism, rather than immediately make me start to consider seriously that the entire tale might be a complete fabrication.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 8th April 2006 at 05:49 AM.
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 8th April 2006, 05:47 AM   #86
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Originally Posted by Medb View Post
.... we don't call it a drumstick until it's dead and on our plates.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
A leg is a leg is a leg.
Claus, you're completely in Humpty-Dumpty territory now.

Not even birds walk on drumsticks. Poultry keepers and vets don't refer to the "drumstick" of a live chicken. Nobody refers to any part of the leg of any mammalian species (including man) as a drumstick, live or dead.

And yet, because "drumstick" is a term for a particular serving of cooked poultry (from the way the bare, disarticulated distal bone - can't remember the technical anatomical terms for this stuff on a Saturday! - protrudes from the rounded meaty portion of the severed leg), Claus wants Darat to agree that it is perfectly reasonable for him to refer to his living, walking human legs as drumsticks.
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.
What dictionary might that be. Claus? One which specifically allows the use of the word "drumstick" for a human leg? Did you buy it last Saturday?

If you're trying to defend the use of the word "eyelid" to describe the spectacle or brille of a snake, by asserting that the word "drumstick" is acceptable usage for the human leg, you're on a loser, I have to say.

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 8th April 2006 at 05:54 AM.
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 8th April 2006, 06:02 AM   #87
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Thinking about this, I'm not sure I entirely agree. Obviously I don't wholly disagree! However, I've been working my way through that train-wreck of a thread entitled "Loose Change", about the Twin Towers attacks, and I see a bit of a parallel.

Much of the material which the CTers cling to consists of minor reporting discrepancies like this. Small inconsistencies, little points that for one reason or another don't quite add up. Pretty much all of the time there is a simple and non-sinister explanation for the discrepancy - misreporting, misremebering, misunderstanding, mixing up two events, that sort of thing. What they don't do is provide serious grounds to doubt the generally-accepted account of events on 11th September, and postulate a "globalist" conspiracy instead.
I don't think it is comparable to the Loose Change people (there's a moniker that fits).

We can verify that snakes don't "open" their eyes. They have nothing that moves (regardless of what people may call it).

Similarly, those Loose Change people are demonstrably wrong. There is not a shred of evidence that there were explosives in the towers, while we have plenty of evidence of huge planes filled with fuel hammering into the towers.
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, 06:05 AM   #88
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Claus, you're completely in Humpty-Dumpty territory now.

Not even birds walk on drumsticks. Poultry keepers and vets don't refer to the "drumstick" of a live chicken. Nobody refers to any part of the leg of any mammalian species (including man) as a drumstick, live or dead.

And yet, because "drumstick" is a term for a particular serving of cooked poultry (from the way the bare, disarticulated distal bone - can't remember the technical anatomical terms for this stuff on a Saturday! - protrudes from the rounded meaty portion of the severed leg), Claus wants Darat to agree that it is perfectly reasonable for him to refer to his living, walking human legs as drumsticks.What dictionary might that be. Claus? One which specifically allows the use of the word "drumstick" for a human leg? Did you buy it last Saturday?

If you're trying to defend the use of the word "eyelid" to describe the spectacle or brille of a snake, by asserting that the word "drumstick" is acceptable usage for the human leg, you're on a loser, I have to say.

Rolfe.
A drumstick is not a leg? O....K.

English seems to be a very versatile language. You can get it to mean whatever you want.
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, 06:13 AM   #89
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
A drumstick is a specific term for a part of the leg of a cooked chicken. This does not mean that you get to use it for the leg of a live human.

Claus, what is it about this that you find so hard to understand?

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 8th April 2006, 06:17 AM   #90
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Oh, I understand now. A leg is not a leg.
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, 06:22 AM   #91
sat556
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 550
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
But that can be said for every newspaper in the world. What newspaper has never embellished even part of an article? I don't think we can find any.
That's true, but I've never heard anybody say "well, if it says it in The Times, it must me true", then laugh.

Why do you care how crap The Sun is anyway?
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, 06:23 AM   #92
Ersby
Fortean
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,872
Is a side of beef a cow?
__________________
"Once a man admits complete and unshakeable faith in his own integrity, he is in an excellent frame of mind to be approached by con men." David W. Maurer, "The Big Con"
Ersby 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, 06:25 AM   #93
sat556
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 550
Claus did you get up and decide it would be a good day for a row? Lol.

How about: stars are not stars, they are ctually light bulbs. You get light from both don't you? Then they must be the same thing.
Or gills and lungs? Same?
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, 06:26 AM   #94
HarryKeogh
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 11,319
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
English seems to be a very versatile language. You can get it to mean whatever you want.
Very versatile. You can try and convince humans the legs they walk on can also be called drumsticks (i.e. the legs of a cooked fowl). It won't wash but you can keep trying.

Claus, I don't understand why an intelligent adult like yourself loves to play dumb so much.
HarryKeogh 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, 06:51 AM   #95
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
A drumstick is not a leg? O....K.

English seems to be a very versatile language. You can get it to mean whatever you want.
Why am I still addressing this? It's a lovely day and I'm trying to go out....

There is some algebra that addresses this matter. Actually, the bit I remember is from 12-year-olds' maths classes, and the author of the text was Charles Dobson - same guy as wrote about that Humpty Dumpty fellow who decided that it would be fun if words meant whatever he wanted them to mean, which I have to say you're close to emulating here, Claus.

The definitive statement was "all lipe shends are umpty". Then the pupils had to say true or false to a series of statements, based on whether or not they must be true in the light of the definitive statement.

Hint. For "All umpty shends are lipe", the correct answer was "false".

A drumstick is a specific term for a particular part of the leg of a particular group of species (fowl), when it is butchered and cooked. There are many specific terms for particular parts of legs of different species under different cirumstances. Having these different terms is what makes it possible for the language to be specific, and for conversations to be meaningful. If you can simply decide that all these specific terms are interchangeable, simply because they are all part of the same larger set (in this case the set of "all words for different parts of the leg"), then we're into Tower of Babel territory.

Claus, you are being repeatedly told here what the words really mean. Your insistence on making them mean whatever you want is simply perverse, and accusing the language of the very fault you yourself are committing is ridiculous.

The original point seems to be a disagreement about the status of the term "eyelid". One point of view is that "eyelid" is a word for anything that covers the eye, in any way. Consequently, we would infer that "brille" is a subset of "eyelids", being the thing that snakes have covering their eyes.

The other point of view is that "eyelid" is the specific term for eye coverings that do not permanently cover the eye, and that "brille" is the specific term for transparent, permanent eye coverings.

I don't actually know who is "right" here, it may be that both points of view are arguable.

Nevertheless, to support the former view by asserting that a human leg can be called a drumstick, is apparently to completely fail to get the point about specific words for subsets of things not being applicable to the entire set. And so seems to me to undermine the argument fatally.

Claus, can we describe our eyelids as brille?

Can we describe the nictitating membranes of birds as brille? As haws?

Can we describe the haws of a cat as brille?

Do you even begin to understand set theory?

Rolfe.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.

Last edited by Rolfe; 8th April 2006 at 06:54 AM.
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 8th April 2006, 07:03 AM   #96
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
This thread has gone from interesting to Alice-In-Wonderland.

A leg is not a leg. Guess I learned something new.
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, 07:41 AM   #97
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 83,860
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Why not drumsticks? Or members?
Not the accepted use and since I try to communicate in a way that people will at least vaguely understand what I am saying I try to use the normal meaning of words not my own made-up ones.


Quote:

You cast doubt on the article by referring to The Sun's reputation. What do you base it on?
Claus please point out where *I* did that and I'll answer you - I can't answer about things *I* haven't claimed.
__________________
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, 07:43 AM   #98
Walter Wayne
Wayne's Words
 
Walter Wayne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,502
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
This thread has gone from interesting to Alice-In-Wonderland.

A leg is not a leg. Guess I learned something new.
No one said a leg is not a leg. When you post strawmen like this it is easy to say this is becoming an Alice-in-Wonderland thread. You've failed to address many links that state snakes don't have eyelids for reputable sources, but then base your assertion on one quote from Wikipedia.
Walter Wayne 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, 09:58 AM   #99
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by Kotatsu View Post
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.
So by this you theorize that it came in with plants imported from Japan? This is a tale repeated too often but with larger invasive alien species.

Few people realize that when they imported Royal Palms for the King Kamehaha School in Hawaii they brought in Typhlops with them that are still there, burrowed in the surrounding soils. Hawaii has a rep of having no ophidians while this little guy persists til this very day happily and blindly chomping away at slugs which I suppose nobody minds. The bilge water of large ships when ejected in waters other than where it was collected also transplant organisms and is a serious problem. Some parts of our Great Lakes are inundated with the alien Zebra Mussel as a result of this.

Invasive aliens like Graptemys scripta elegans and Rana catesbiena in Italy and elsewhere in Europe are a problem as is Bufo marinus, deliberately introduced into Australia. In Florida right now there are more than a dozen aliens veying for a niche in the ecosystem, crowding out indigenous species. There is a wholesale slaughter of two species of iguanids which are running amok there. As vegetarians and tree climbers, no fruit or leafy vegetable is safe from them.


Quote:
2. Ah, yes. "Fauna & Flora". It calls itself a "magazine for popular biology".
Probably somewhat more reliable than The Sun.
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, 10:30 AM   #100
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,097
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
This thread has gone from interesting to Alice-In-Wonderland.

A leg is not a leg. Guess I learned something new.
Tabbys are Cats. Lions are cats. Tigers are cats.
Cats are not lions.
Simple logic. A subset is not the set.
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn 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, 10:53 AM   #101
Big Les
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,028
Long time lurker here, finding this thread as frustrating as the "Interesting" Ian threads. The same perverse and subjective "logic" is being applied, and it is doing my head in, frankly.

By CFLarsen's logic, I could describe my car as a an articulated lorry. Sure, people *might* understand that I was referring to my car, but only once they'd a) seen it, or b) realised that I was as mad as a bag of hammers.

To the vast majority, including those that work with, study, own, or are otherwise involved or interested in snakes, they *do not* have eyelids. Furthermore, to all those that have a working knowledge and understanding of language, calling either a leg a drumstick or a brille an eyelid, is utterly nonsensical.
Big Les 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, 11:40 AM   #102
slingblade
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 23,466
Overheard down at the ranch:

Vet: Farmer Lee, I've examined all of your animals, and I have a few reports.
I sutured that barbed-wire injury in your Holstein's rump roast; one of your hogs had a gash in his bacon which I closed with surgical staples; and three of your chickens have fractured drumsticks, and will have to be butchered.

Oh, and one of your horses had an infection in her dog food and glue, but antibiotics should clear that up.
slingblade 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, 12:37 PM   #103
delphi_ote
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Spot the error.
Snake found in broccoli? Quick! Someone call mayday!!!
delphi_ote 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, 12:42 PM   #104
delphi_ote
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
There's only one thing worse: Finding half a caterpillar in your cauliflower....
Better version of this joke:
Quote:
What's worse than finding half a worm in your apple?
The Holocaust

And while I'm making random off-topic jokes...
Quote:
What do you call a black man who flies an airplane?
A pilot, you racist jackass!
delphi_ote 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, 12:58 PM   #105
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by slingblade View Post
Overheard down at the ranch:

Vet: Farmer Lee, I've examined all of your animals, and I have a few reports.
I sutured that barbed-wire injury in your Holstein's rump roast; one of your hogs had a gash in his bacon which I closed with surgical staples; and three of your chickens have fractured drumsticks, and will have to be butchered.

Oh, and one of your horses had an infection in her dog food and glue, but antibiotics should clear that up.
Yeah, I knew a lamb with broken chops. And a turkey that got the stuffing kicked out of it. And a buffalo with a sprained wing.

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 8th April 2006 at 02:07 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 8th April 2006, 01:27 PM   #106
Mahatma Kane Jeeves
Post No Bills
 
Mahatma Kane Jeeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 936
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Let's cut the crap here, OK?
Quote:
An eyelid is a thin fold of skin and muscle that covers and protects an eye.
Wikipedia
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
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.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Wikipedia is a highly disputed source.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
That's the problem with Wikipedia: Those who shout the loudest, wins.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
It's an encyclopedia filled with errors.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
Sure. But the inherent weakness of Wikipedia is that there are no authoritative body that decides what is right. Anyone can edit whatever they want. Including falsehoods.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
There are many articles in Wikipedia that has false information.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
And yet, you have no problems referring to Wikipedia here:


Hypocrite.
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
I refer you to Webster. We have to work from a common acceptance of the meaning of words. Otherwise, we create intentional confusion instead understanding.
Webster and American Heritage definitions, courtesy of HarryKeogh:
Originally Posted by HarryKeogh View Post
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=eyelid

eyeˇlid n.
Either of two folds of skin and muscle that can be closed over the exposed portion of the eyeball. Either of two folds of skin that can be moved to cover or open the eye

It seems that an eyelid has to move.

plus I think a herpetological society would know better than us.

Snakes lack eyelids. A snake's eyes are protected by a specialize clear scale called a brille. The brille is shed with the rest of the skin as a snake grows ...

www.wnyherp.org/herp-information/reptile/snake.php
Mahatma Kane Jeeves 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, 01:51 PM   #107
Medb
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 113
Mahatma, that was superb. I have a lump in my throat and can't continue.

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, 06:07 PM   #108
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
This thread has gone from interesting to Alice-In-Wonderland.

A leg is not a leg. Guess I learned something new.
I can't believe I'm still reading this. As rwguinn so rightly said, a subset is not the set.

Claus, do you have any understanding at all of set theory? Do you even understand the difference between a generic term and a specific term?

What is it about the many clear and understandable explanations of the semantics that you find so difficult to understand?

"Leg" is the generic term for the pelvic limbs of most mammals, birds and reptiles (and maybe more, it's getting late). (It is also used as a term for some - but not all - thoracic limbs of these species.)

"Drumstick" is the specific term for the disarticulated distal pelvic limb of a butchered fowl, especially after cooking.

What is it about this definition that makes you want to claim that you can therefore use the word "drumstick" to refer to any pelvic limb of any species you like?

Why do you repeatedly assert that these clear explanations of the nuances of the language, and why you can't just use vaguely related words any way you like, are capricious and arbitrary? The one being capricious and arbitrary is you. You are Humpty Dumpty.

Is your repeated lame response of "A leg is not a leg" some sort of surreal joke, or are you really so deficient in intelligence that you can't follow what so many people have repeatedly explained?
Quote:
Claus, can we describe our eyelids as brille?

Can we describe the nictitating membranes of birds as brille? As haws?

Can we describe the haws of a cat as brille?
And another one. Can we call the fins of dolphins, legs? Can we call our legs fins? Can we call our arms wings?
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.
I repeat (and I seem to see a lot of repetitions of this question in my future), please name the dictionary and produce the reference that states that "drumsticks" is acceptable usage for live human legs.

Claus, when you're in a hole, it's advisable to stop digging. The more you repeat "A leg is not a leg", the more credibility you lose. And remember, these posts are permanent. This is just embarrassing now.

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 8th April 2006, 06:22 PM   #109
clarsct
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,867
Hmmmmmm.


Maybe his English isn't as fluent as we have been led to believe?
clarsct 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 9th April 2006, 07:13 AM   #110
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Well, it might be so, but all past evidence suggests that he's extremely fluent.

In any case, if you were arguing semantics in a language you weren't 100% au fait with, wouldn't you defer to the native speakers of that language rather than sit on a pedestal insisting that you were the only one who was right?

Hah, quite pertinent little item on Quote Unquote on Radio 4, at 12.05 today. Abraham Lincoln used to ask the question, "how many legs does a dog have, if you call a tail a leg?" Panellist said, the answer can't be five, can it? That's too easy. There has to be a catch.

Presenter said, when given the answer four, Lincoln would say, "Wrong. Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg."

How many drumsticks does Darat have, if he calls his legs drumsticks?

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.
Claus, please name the dictionary that states that "drumsticks" is acceptable usage for live human legs. Please provide full publication details, and the full text of the entry you are relying on for this assertion.

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 9th April 2006, 01:00 PM   #111
NoZed Avenger
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 11,286
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
How many drumsticks does Darat have, if he calls his legs drumsticks?
Four, because he ordered the bucket with all dark meat.
NoZed Avenger 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 9th April 2006, 01:19 PM   #112
Kotatsu
Phthirapterist
 
Kotatsu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Good Anvil
Posts: 2,311
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
So by this you theorize that it came in with plants imported from Japan? This is a tale repeated too often but with larger invasive alien species.
We are by no means sure that it is a Biwadrilus, as we only have access to one picture, and that picture isn't very good. Apparently the worm is rare even in Japan, and it seems prudent to assume it has been introduced with some of the plants.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Few people realize that when they imported Royal Palms for the King Kamehaha School in Hawaii they brought in Typhlops with them that are still there, burrowed in the surrounding soils. Hawaii has a rep of having no ophidians while this little guy persists til this very day happily and blindly chomping away at slugs which I suppose nobody minds. The bilge water of large ships when ejected in waters other than where it was collected also transplant organisms and is a serious problem. Some parts of our Great Lakes are inundated with the alien Zebra Mussel as a result of this.

Invasive aliens like Graptemys scripta elegans and Rana catesbiena in Italy and elsewhere in Europe are a problem as is Bufo marinus, deliberately introduced into Australia. In Florida right now there are more than a dozen aliens veying for a niche in the ecosystem, crowding out indigenous species. There is a wholesale slaughter of two species of iguanids which are running amok there. As vegetarians and tree climbers, no fruit or leafy vegetable is safe from them.
My master thesis - which is the whole reason I was out looking for worms in the first place - is on a similar subject. I have been studying an aquatic oligochaete (my supervisor has discouraged me to mention its name until the data are published) and found that it consists of three genetically very separated forms. One of them - which we term the "European form" as most of our samples of this clade are from Europe - seems to be invading both Japan and the US; in both cases, we believe it might be outcompeting local forms.

However, very few people really care if one kind of aquatic oligochaeta (it lives in leaf pockets and in sandy substrates, and I'd wager most people will never ever see one) is replaced locally with a morphologically identical one. It's different with larger and more popular animals (ones which can be made into cuddly and appealing stuffed toys, for example).

I heard the San Fransisco Bay is estimated to have had at least one known introduced species every year for the last hundred years, most of which are marine invertebrates. It's an amazing number.

Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Probably somewhat more reliable than The Sun.
I have no idea. But I did get to see the worm. It was the longest worm I have ever seen, easily over 30 cm. And perhaps 3 mm thick. Its "face" had what looked like a toothless but somehow happy smile. A very weird worm.
__________________
"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 9th April 2006, 03:38 PM   #113
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
Just bumping this thread, to note that although Claus has been posting elsewhere, he hasn't posted here for over 32 hours, and specifically not since Mahatma Kane Jeeves' masterly post. I'm sure he's not running away from the situation, so I'm just making a note.

It may be of some assistance to note that in another thread, Claus has attempted to explain that by "What do you call...." he actually meant "What would one call....", and by ".... that you walk on", he actually meant the "you" to include not only the human race in general, but also the Christmas turkey.

In my opinion, such poor self-expression is not a good sign when it comes to an argument on semantics, but then I can barely say hello in Danish, so there you go.

I have explained that the answer is still legs, as "members" is too broad (encompassing all limbs including arms and legs and the male sexual organ), and not even chickens walk on drumsticks, as the word specifically refers to a cut of meat from a dead and butchered and cooked fowl.

I have asked what relevance this has to the eyelids/brille debate, but I'm not sure if it's worth pressing for an answer on that.

I hope we might continue the eyelids/brille debate here, where more are participating. As well as wanting to know if Claus still maintains that Wikipedia is the definitive reference in this case, trumping even Webster's (considering what the Mahatma posted), I am interested to find out whether, if he thinks brille are eyelids, does this mean he also thinks that eyelids are brille? And if not why not?

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 9th April 2006, 03:45 PM   #114
CFLarsen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,367
Alice in Wonderland.
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 9th April 2006, 03:51 PM   #115
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 42,696
As in, since you do not fully understand the meanings of some words, you will emulate Humpty Dumpty and decide that they mean whatever you want them to mean?

Yes, it seems that's the case.

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 9th April 2006, 04:11 PM   #116
SteveGrenard
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 5,528
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
Foot long? Meh! We have worms bigger than that.
You do.


Australian Giant worm (grows to 13 feet):

http://www.thegreencommunity.org/giant_worms.html


We have a giant in America as well which was so rare it hasn’t been collected since 1978 ..

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2002776215_webearthworm01.html

Last edited by SteveGrenard; 9th April 2006 at 04:37 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 9th April 2006, 04:26 PM   #117
fsol
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 1,064
All this talk of drumsticks somehow makes me think of Kent Hovind talking about kinds. I know it isn't really the same thing but well, there you go.
fsol 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 9th April 2006, 04:44 PM   #118
logical muse
LogMu
 
logical muse's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 2,050
Originally Posted by SteveGrenard View Post
Yeah, I knew a lamb with broken chops. And a turkey that got the stuffing kicked out of it. And a buffalo with a sprained wing.
Chicken nuggets.

Fish fingers.

Crab sticks.
__________________
how to spell definitely
evolution is not just a theory
"Far from terminating the vicious regress, God aggravates it with a vengeance." -- Richard Dawkins
logical muse 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 9th April 2006, 07:17 PM   #119
rwguinn
Penultimate Amazing
 
rwguinn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,097
Originally Posted by CFLarsen View Post
This thread has gone from interesting to Alice-In-Wonderland.

A leg is not a leg. Guess I learned something new.
you are being intentionally obtuse.*
An egg is not an omelette- untill it is cooked with cheese, meat, and/or veggies. A leg is not a drumstick untill it is (A) coated with flour and spices and fried, or (b) placed in an oven, with or without spices and flavorings (or flavourings), or (c) grilled, broiled, poached or otherwise cooked and removed from the remainder of the fowl.

* known as absurdly stupid in many circles
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."
"
I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275
rwguinn 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 10th April 2006, 02:34 PM   #120
Mahatma Kane Jeeves
Post No Bills
 
Mahatma Kane Jeeves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 936
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I'm sure he's not running away from the situation, so I'm just making a note.
Quote:
. . . and the Hatter hurriedly left the court, without even waiting to put his shoes on.
Alice's Adventure's in Wonderland

Mahatma Kane Jeeves 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 04:21 AM.
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.