Fact of the Day

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - GROVER CLEVELAND

Did you know... Joe Biden is regarded as the 46th president of the United States. Yet, only 45 people have filled that position. Blame Grover Cleveland for this irritating historical discrepancy.

 

Take a look at any U.S. history textbook and you’ll see the New Jersey-born Democrat cited as our 22nd and 24th president. Cleveland is the only two-term president to serve non-consecutive terms. He won the 1884 election against Republican candidate James G. Blaine, becoming the first Democrat to win the White House since the Civil War, but lost his reelection bid to Republican Benjamin Harrison in 1888.

 

The 1892 election presented a rematch between Cleveland and Harrison with the addition of a third-party candidate, James B. Weaver of the People’s Party. Weaver had a strong showing on election day: He won all of the electoral votes in Kansas, Colorado, Nevada, and Idaho, and shaved support from his opponents in Oregon and North Dakota, two states that split their electoral votes. In the end, however, Cleveland bested the competition with 277 electoral votes to Harrison’s 145 and Weaver’s 22.

 

Therefore, most historians count Grover Cleveland as two separate presidents. They justify the distinction by arguing that the four-year gap between terms meant that the first- and second-term Clevelands weren’t the same president, despite being the exact same person.

 

That did not seem logical to later President Harry S. Truman. “If you count the administrations of Grover Cleveland twice because another president held office between his first and second term," Truman once said, “you might try to justify the designation of me as 33rd president. But then why don’t you number all the second terms of other presidents and the third and fourth terms of President Roosevelt, and where will I be? I am the 32nd president.” (For the record, historians count Truman as the 33rd president.)

 

In 2009, President Barack Obama reignited the debate during his first inaugural address. After being sworn in, he erroneously claimed that “45 Americans have now taken the presidential oath."

 

 

Source: Why Does Grover Cleveland Count as Two Presidents?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - SOLAR STORM

Did you know... Scientists just observed a powerful solar storm that could carry the northern lights over the lower 48 in the near future. By Tim Brinkhof |1 hour ago

 

A “severe” geomagnetic storm tore through the heliosphere on September 13 and 14, according to NOAA’s Space Weather Prediction Center, and might make the northern lights visible as far south as Alabama in the coming days.

 

The agency issued an alert on September 17 warning that the two coronal mass ejections (CMEs) observed over that weekend could cause potential disruptions to Earth’s power grid, navigational satellites, and high frequency radio. But in good news for skywatchers, the storm may cause skies to glow green, pink, or purple across the northern half of the lower 48 states.

 

Geomagnetic storms are disturbances in Earth’s magnetosphere caused by CMEs and solar winds. These winds carry charged particles from the sun, which interact with gasses in Earth’s atmosphere and give off different colors of light around the North and South Poles. Usually, the northern lights can only be observed from within the auroral oval, an area that encompasses the Arctic regions of Scandinavia, Russia, Alaska, and Canada. 

 

Especially powerful geomagnetic storms can push these particles into the lower latitudes: after a G5 storm, the most severe level, in May 2024, people observed the northern lights in Oklahoma and Florida. During November 2023, the aurora borealis was observed as far south as the Netherlands, far removed from the Arctic circle, much to the surprise of many of its citizens.

 

Contrary to what its consistent appearance from Earth would suggest, the surface of the sun is an incredibly dynamic environment. It moves through 11-year solar cycles in which eruptions of radiation (in the form of CMEs or solar flares) shoot out from the star’s core at higher frequency and with greater intensity, traveling across space and interacting with Earth’s magnetosphere. 

 

This interaction not only creates the phenomenon we know as the northern lights, but can also lead to power outages and radio blackouts. The Space Weather Prediction Center’s alert mentioned possible “voltage irregularities, which may need to be corrected, increased drag on low Earth orbit satellites, and intermittent disruptions to satellite navigation systems and high frequency radio.” Those lucky enough to be within the 30-minute predicted auroral extent—essentially, where scientists think the aurora will be visible—can try to view the spectacle if nighttime weather conditions permit.

 

The strongest geomagnetic storm ever recorded took place in September 1859, when G5-level solar flares produced northern lights that were visible from Mexico to Hawaii. Reportedly, these lights were so bright that miners in Colorado mistook them for the rising sun, and New Englanders were able to read after dusk.

 

The northern lights we’ll be seeing this week won’t be nearly as bright, but they’ll still be worth a look – especially if you can’t make it to the Arctic any time soon.

 

 

Source: “Severe” Solar Storm Might Bring Northern Lights to the Deep South

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - WON BUT LOST

Did you know... Winning both the popular vote and getting the most electoral college votes wasn’t enough for Andrew Jackson to win the 1824 election.

 

In 1824, Andrew Jackson found himself in a confusing situation: He won both the popular vote and got the most votes in the electoral college, but lost the election anyway.

 

That year, there were four main contenders for president, all from the Democratic-Republican party: Secretary of State John Quincy Adams, Secretary of the Treasury William Harris Crawford, Speaker of the House Henry Clay, and Tennessee Senator Andrew Jackson.

 

At the time, a candidate needed 131 electoral college votes to win the presidency. After all the ballots were counted, Jackson had received 99 votes to John Quincy Adams’s 84. The remaining votes were split between Crawford and Clay—41 and 37 respectively.

 

Though Jackson clearly received the most votes—both popular and electoral—he didn’t reach that magic 131 number. Because no one did, the election was kicked to the House of Representatives. According to the 12th Amendment, which refined the process of voting for the president and vice president, the House could only consider the top three candidates, which meant Clay was out.

 

And that’s when things got interesting. Clay didn’t particularly care for John Quincy Adams, but we know the two of them met privately before the House voted. It’s since been alleged that the pair made what is now known as a “Corrupt Bargain”—Clay promised to work behind the scenes to get the House vote to go Adams’s way, and in return, Adams guaranteed Clay the Secretary of State position.

 

Both men denied making such a deal, but the proof may have been in the pudding. Clay began actively campaigning for Adams, working hard to turn his votes into votes for the latter. In the end, Adams carried 13 states, Jackson took seven, and Crawford four. As the results were announced, there was so much booing, hissing, and general uproar from the public galleries in the House that the Speaker of the House—Henry Clay—had them all thrown out.

 

Jackson eventually had his revenge, though. In the 1828 election, he handily defeated the incumbent John Quincy Adams, and served two terms to Adams’s one.

 

Source: The Time Andrew Jackson Won the Vote But Lost the Presidency

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - PEE SMELLS FUNNY

Did you know... Even Benjamin Franklin noted that eating asparagus “shall give our urine a disagreeable odor.”

 

Asparagus has a long and storied history: It was mentioned in the myths and the scholarly writings of ancient Greece, and its cultivation was the subject of a detailed lesson in Cato the Elder’s treatise, On Agriculture. But it wasn’t until the turn of the 18th century that discussion of the link between asparagus and odorous urine emerged.

 

In 1731, John Arbuthnot, physician to Queen Anne, noted that asparagus “affects the urine with a foetid smell ... and therefore have been suspected by some physicians as not friendly to the kidneys.” Benjamin Franklin also noticed that eating asparagus “shall give our urine a disagreeable odor.”

 

Since then, there has been debate over what is responsible for the stinky pee phenomenon. Polish chemist and doctor Marceli Nencki identified a compound called methanethiol as the cause in 1891, after a study that involved four men eating about three and a half pounds of asparagus apiece. In 1975, Robert H. White, a chemist at the University of California at San Diego, used gas chromatography to pin down several compounds known as S-methyl thioesters as the culprits. Other researchers have blamed various sulfur-containing metabolites.

 

What Is Asparagusic Acid?
Asparagusic acid, typically found in asparagus, contains sulfur and can sometimes lead to pungent odors. One study demonstrated that asparagusic acid taken orally by subjects known to produce stinky asparagus pee produced odorous urine.

 

The researchers concluded that asparagusic acid and its derivatives are the precursors of urinary odor (compared, in different scientific papers, to the smell of “rotten cabbage,” “boiling cabbage” and “vegetable soup”). The various compounds that contribute to the distinct smell—and were sometimes blamed as the sole cause in the past—are metabolized from asparagusic acid.

 

Exactly how these compounds are produced as we digest asparagus remains unclear, so let’s turn to an equally compelling, but more answerable question.

 

Why Can't Some People Smell Asparagus Pee?
For a 1980 study, subjects whose pee stank sniffed the urine of subjects whose pee supposedly didn’t. Guess what? The pee stank. It turns out, we’re not only divided by the ability to produce odorous asparagus pee, but the ability to smell it.

 

A 2016 study by the Harvard School of Public Health found that more than 800 genes regulate whether person can detect funky smells in their pee after chomping down on asparagus. After analyzing results from nearly 7000 participants, they determined that roughly 60 percent were asparagus anosmic, meaning they didn’t pick up on any urine odors.

 

An inability to perceive a smell (anosmia) keeps certain people from smelling the compounds that make up even the most offensive asparagus pee, and like those who produce less stinky pee, they’re in the majority.

 

Producing and perceiving asparagus pee don’t go hand-in-hand, either. The 1980 study found that some people who don’t produce stinky pee could detect the rotten cabbage smell in another person’s urine. On the flip side, some stink producers aren’t able to pick up the scent in their own urine or the urine of others, either.

 

 

Source: Why Does Asparagus Make Your Pee Smell Funny?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - HOUSEGUEST ETIQUETTE

Did you know... When you’re invited to stay at someone’s home, it’s important to be a gracious guest. Your behavior during the visit can leave a lasting impression and can impact your relationship with your hosts. Whether you’re visiting an old friend or spending the holidays with loved ones, it’s always wise to put your best foot forward. To that end, good etiquette isn’t just about following rules — it’s also about making the experience pleasant and stress-free for everyone involved. The next time you visit someone’s home, keep these etiquette tips in mind to ensure an enjoyable stay for both you and your host.

 

 

Communicate Your Travel Plans in Advance

Before your visit, make sure your host knows exactly when you’ll be arriving, how long you plan to stay, and any special needs you might have, including dietary considerations or allergies. It’s never ideal to arrive unannounced or to leave your departure date open-ended. Being clear about your plans as far in advance as possible will help your host prepare for your stay and accommodate you comfortably. According to the Emily Post Institute, the organization founded by the eponymous etiquette expert in 1946, visits should be “short and sweet” — typically no more than three nights. However long your stay, be sure your host is in agreement with your plans. When possible, try to work around your host’s household schedule (for instance, work hours and school start and end times) and avoid late-night arrivals or departures that could disrupt their sleep. Don’t bring any unexpected additional visitors, including children or friends, without clearing it with your host in advance. Most etiquette experts agree you shouldn’t ask to bring your pet along, as this could put your host in an awkward position. If you need to travel with your pet, offer to stay in a hotel or ask about nearby pet care. This will give your host the chance to extend their invitation to include your pet, if they can.

 

Bring a Gift for Your Hosts

A good rule of thumb when visiting someone’s home — whether for a few hours or a few days — is to “always show up with something in hand,” according to the Emily Post Institute. A small token of appreciation, such as a bottle of wine, bouquet of flowers, potted plant, or box of chocolates, can go a long way in expressing gratitude. Bringing a gift shows you value the effort your host has put into your stay, and helps set the tone for your visit. If you’re staying with a family, consider a gift everyone can enjoy, such as a board game, puzzle, or snack basket. You could also show your appreciation by buying groceries and preparing dinner one night, or treating your hosts to an evening out during your visit. If your hosts have young children, you could even offer to babysit one evening so they can go out to dinner. Alternatively, you could offer to pay a sitter so you can all go out together.

 

Respect the House Rules and Routines

Every home has its own set of routines and expectations, whether about wearing shoes inside, noise levels in the early morning and late evening, if phones are allowed at the dinner table, or when (and where) meals are typically eaten. Make an effort to observe your hosts and follow their house rules without being asked. If in doubt, it’s perfectly acceptable to ask your host whether there’s anything you need to know. It’s a simple way to show respect for their space and routines. When it comes to consumables, ask before drinking the last of the coffee or juice or snagging the last piece of fruit left in the bowl on the counter. Being considerate of house rules also extends to any children or pets in the home. Ask what’s acceptable before bringing along any sugary treats for the kids or queuing up your favorite TV-MA series in a common room. Likewise, check with your hosts before giving Fido a treat or allowing Fluffy to share the couch or bed with you.

 

Be Tidy and Self-Sufficient

Whether you’re staying in a guest room or sleeping on a sofa, do your best to keep your area neat. Make the bed every morning, tuck away your belongings, and avoid leaving a mess in common areas. Also be mindful of how long you spend in shared spaces such as the bathroom, and return any borrowed items, including magazines and phone chargers, to their proper place when you are finished with them. While your host may be eager to make you comfortable, don’t expect them to wait on you hand and foot. Offer to help with chores such as setting the table, doing the dishes, or walking the dog. When your visit comes to an end, try to leave the space as clean as you found it, if not cleaner. Wipe down bathroom counters, take out any trash, and double-check that you haven’t left anything behind. Ask if you should strip the bed linens; if not, make the bed before you leave so your host can wash the sheets at their convenience.

 

Express Your Gratitude and Extend an Invitation

When it’s time to leave, it’s nice to express your appreciation for your host’s hospitality and the time they spent with you. Mention any specific favorite moments and be sincere in extending an invitation for them to visit your own home or city. A handwritten thank-you note, whether left behind or mailed once you arrive back home, is a thoughtful and appreciated gesture. If you took pictures during your visit, you may consider sending some along with your note, as a reminder of the memories you made together.

 

 

Source: Etiquette Tips for Houseguests

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - THE SKYSCRAPER

Did you know.... Fazlur Khan and the idea that would turn architecture on its head.

 

In December 1965, the psychic Jeane Dixon made a prediction: Chicago’s John Hancock Center would come tumbling down. The astrologer and syndicated columnist had risen to fame after predicting the assassination of John F. Kennedy, and now she foresaw the demise of the Windy City’s newest, and soon-to-be tallest, skyscraper—before construction had even begun.

 

When Dixon spoke out, crews had just broken ground on a plot of land north of Chicago’s main business district. Those involved may not have admitted it, but the prediction likely made them nervous—and not just because of Dixon’s track record. The 100-story building was to become the second-tallest structure in the world, and its radical design was unprecedented. 

 

Structural engineer Fazlur Rahman Khan, the man behind that design, was only 35 years old when he submitted his plans. He had worked at the Chicago architectural firm Skidmore, Owings & Merrill (SOM) for just a decade. For the architecture world, he was remarkably young. But if he was wet behind the ears, he didn’t show it.

 

Khan’s easygoing nature was legendary among his colleagues. And he had his own read on the future. At upper-crust Chicago parties, he’d entertain high-society women by reading palms and telling fortunes, a trick he’d learned as a boy growing up in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Khan was unmoved by Dixon’s prediction. A tumbling John Hancock Center would end his career, but he had worked hard to prove the integrity of his design, and no newspaper astrologer could convince him otherwise. 

 

Then, one day in March 1966, he received a phone call: His skyscraper was sinking.

 

Fazlur Khan seemed an unlikely candidate for engineering stardom. The tallest structure in his hometown of Dhaka was fewer than three stories high. He didn’t see his first skyscraper in person until he was 21 years old. In fact, he likely had never even stepped inside a mid-rise building until he moved to the United States to study structural engineering at graduate school. But Khan, the son of a mathematician, proved to be a civil engineering wunderkind. He received two master’s degrees in just three years.

 

At the University of Illinois, he studied under Hardy Cross, a legendary engineer who taught Khan not to see buildings as concrete monoliths, but as living things. Cross had a mantra: “You must learn to think as the structure thinks.” Many ridiculed Cross’s ideas, writes Khan’s daughter, Yasmin, in her book Engineering Architecture, but Khan took the advice to heart.

 

“I put myself in the place of a whole building, feeling every part,” Khan said in an interview with Engineering News-Record. “In my mind I visualize the stresses and twisting a building undergoes.” 

 

Khan preached “structural empathy,” believing that buildings should absorb stress and react accordingly. If someone pushes you in the chest, your ribs alone don’t prevent you from falling—your stomach clenches, your calves brace, and your heels dig into the ground. The pieces work in tandem. The same went for skyscrapers. 

 

When Khan and his friend and design partner, architect Bruce Graham, sat down to design the Hancock Center, the architectural world was in the midst of a break from skyscrapers. “Conventional” skyscrapers like the Empire State Building had proven prohibitively expensive. The higher a building, the more weight is exerted from the top. The building must also withstand winds, and these forces—downward and lateral—turn skyscraper construction into a riddle. A lot of steel and concrete is needed to keep a super-tall building standing, and all that material shrinks usable open space, riddling floors with dark, labyrinthine corridors. If you don’t have floor space to sell, what’s the point of making a building tall?

 

Khan had a solution. A few years earlier, Graham had asked him what the most economical building would look like. Khan replied, “A tube.” Like the bamboo that sprouted around Dhaka, a hollow tube lent a high-rise vertical durability. 

 

Graham and Khan put the theory into practice while constructing Chicago’s 42-story Dewitt-Chestnut Apartments. The building was supported not by an inner grid of concrete and steel, but by its facade. Structurally, it had more in common with a grain silo than a traditional skyscraper—but it worked. The duo now had the blueprint for pursuing more ambitious structures. 

 

Indeed, Khan’s plans for the John Hancock Center used the same tubular design to an extreme. But to achieve heights topping 1000 feet, it needed more support. Rather than fill the interior with columns—and retreat back to the thinking of Stone Age architects—he applied a theory he had cooked up with one of his students at the Illinois Institute of Technology. The student, Mikio Sasaki, wondered how to build a tall, cost-effective tubular building. The solution? Reinforce the facade with large x’s.

 

“It became a proven new structural concept waiting to be tested on a real building,” Khan wrote. “John Hancock Center offered that opportunity.” 

 

Elegant and economical, Khan’s design for the John Hancock Center was supposed to usher in a new generation of skyscrapers. But when it came time to hoist thousands of tons of steel up into the sky, his employer got cold feet. To dispel any doubt, Khan brought in something new to his team at SOM: computer models. Two young programming experts calculated the equations in record time. (Soon after, they left SOM to work on Star Wars.)

 

Unconvinced by newfangled computers, SOM’s brass insisted on asking outside experts to determine the safety and feasibility of the project. When one recommended a different design—and that it be overseen by a new team—an infuriated Khan issued an ultimatum: Either they let him proceed, or he’d leave the firm.

 

Khan also needed to soothe investors, who were worried about wind. The building was designed to be pliant, and Khan’s models showed that the skyscraper was 25 percent stronger than what Chicago’s wind code required. But he needed to prove that gusts would be imperceptible on the building’s top floors.

 

One Sunday afternoon, Khan took his family to Chicago’s Museum of Science and Industry. There, at a washing machine exhibit sponsored by Maytag, he and his daughter stood on a rotating platform designed to mimic the oscillating motion of a washing machine. When the tub rumbled to life, his daughter flinched—and Khan had an epiphany. He persuaded the museum to let him use the exhibit to stage a motion perception test, asking eight volunteers to stand, sit, or lie down at the base of the empty tub. As the motor rotated the floor, everyone tallied their perceptions of movement. Using that data, Khan ensured the Hancock’s sway would fit into the comfort zone. Shortly after, he got the OK to build.

 

Chicago is not an easy place to build skyscrapers. Unlike New York City, with its easy-to-reach bedrock, Chicago is swamp and sand. For centuries, it was difficult to walk there. That’s why Chicago built 561 miles of wooden sidewalks in the 19th century—which became the 561 miles of kindling that fueled the Great Chicago Fire of 1871.

 

None of that stopped the engineers rebuilding Chicago from reaching for new heights. In 1885, they completed the 138-foot-tall Home Insurance Building, the world’s first modern skyscraper. Other steel Goliaths followed. An 1891 New York Times article offered begrudging but skeptical praise about the towers sprouting from the “slimy ooze,” asking, “Who shall restrain the great layer of jelly in Chicago’s cake?”

 

If Chicago was built on swamp, the site of the John Hancock Center was soup. The area was water until the city dumped ash and debris from the Great Fire there as landfill. In 1886, an eccentric con artist named George Wellington Streeter claimed the land after running his steamboat ashore. (Constables tried to evict him, but Streeter fired buckshot whenever they approached.) The area, now called Streeterville, is home to the deepest bedrock in
Chicago. Khan was building right on top of it.  

 

Khan’s design called for 57 caissons—8-foot-thick concrete columns—to be plunged into the bedrock to support the building’s 46,000-ton steel frame. One of those caissons had to be extended up to 197 feet below the surface, then a world record. But soon after the caissons were put in place, Khan received bad news from his field man at the site: One of the caissons had shifted seven-eighths of an inch. The base of the $100,000,000 building was sinking. Khan immediately called a meeting at the building site, looked at the concrete pillars, and cleared his head.

 

Khan always had a knack for identifying invisible problems. In Mir M. Ali’s Art of the Skyscraper, a friend of Khan’s relays a story about having lunch with him at engineering college in Calcutta. After the food was served, the friend was about to dive in when Khan asked the waiter to change his plate. “There is a hairline crack in your plate where bacteria may grow,” he explained. The waiter whisked the dish away.

 

Looking over the Hancock’s groundwork, Khan knew the design wasn’t at fault. It had to be the caissons. He ordered sonic tests to find weak spots and found that the contractors, in an effort to save time and money, had poured concrete while the drills were in place. When they pulled the machinery out, the concrete was still setting. Chicago’s soil had seeped into the gaps, causing the shift.

 

Crews had to check all the caissons, setting the project back six months. After it was deemed safe, Khan made sure the 100-story building was finished on time—and it only cost as much as a conventional 45-story building. Suddenly, skyscrapers made financial sense again.

 

Four years later, Khan finished the 108-story Sears Tower (now the Willis Tower). But by then, the Hancock had stolen Chicago’s heart. “Dark, strong, powerful, maybe even a little threatening—like a muscle-bound, Prohibition-era gangster clad in a tuxedo—the John Hancock Center says ‘Chicago’ as inimitably as the sunburstlike summit of the Chrysler Building evokes the jazzy theatricality of New York,” wrote architecture critic Blair Kamin.

 

 

There were only minor quibbles about the wind. Employees at the restaurant on the 95th floor noted that bottles in the wine rack clanked. (They moved the wine to the basement, to be fetched via express elevator.) When one woman was upset her chandelier swayed on breezy days, Khan reinforced the fixture himself.

 

One day, Khan was sitting in the Hancock’s open-air plaza when two women began admiring the building. As his daughter writes, Khan couldn’t help but eavesdrop. “ ‘The diagonals,’ one woman explained, ‘were placed on the facade with artistic intent by the architect.’ ” Khan was flattered: His design was so elegant, it could only be explained as an artistic addition. 

 

 

 

Upon its completion in 1969, the John Hancock Center was the second-tallest building in the world. (Now, according to its website, it ranks 33rd.) Many of the skyscrapers ahead of it on the list of the world’s tallest buildings are descendants of Khan’s design. Thanks to the clever structural engineer, who knew that strength comes from flexibility, the skyscraper shed its status as a relic. Today, it is how a city reinvents itself. A growing skyline is a reminder that we will never stop reaching for greater heights.

 

In 1982, Khan died of a heart attack in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Today, construction is underway there on the Jeddah Tower, a skyscraper that, when it’s completed, will become the world’s tallest at around 3300 feet high. Its “buttressed core” evolved from Khan’s tubes. The innovation earned William F. Baker, the engineer behind the concept, one of architecture’s highest honors: the Fazlur Khan Lifetime Achievement Medal.

 

Source: The Man Who Saved the Skyscraper

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - OLD AGE

Did you know.... Death doesn‘t come strictly from being old, though medicine still insists on saying so. Here’s why.

 

If anyone could credibly stand as an example of dying from old age, it would be Jeanne Calment. In 1997, Calment passed at the age of 122 years, making her the oldest human with a documented paper trail of her lifespan.

 

Though the cause of her death wasn’t specified, it almost certainly wasn’t from simply being elderly. While many deaths are said to be “of old age,” the term largely amounts to a hand wave over the real cause of death. It’s not old age that kills: It’s the ailments that come with it.

 

“There are always other pre-existing diseases, or new diseases, that cause the deaths in question,” Dr. Elizabeth Dzeng, an assistant professor of medicine at University of California, San Francisco, told Gizmodo in 2020. “’Old age’ isn’t something you’d put on a death certificate—most likely, it would be something like cardiac arrest, which occurs due to some underlying issue such as an infection, heart attack, or cancer.”

 

Diseases that might appear more obviously in younger people might show up more insidiously in older populations, Dzeng added. “With pneumonia, for instance, they may not show the normal signs of infection—they may instead present with high blood sugar, if they’re diabetic, or if they have dementia, they may just present with changes in their mental status: heightened confusion, an inability to do the things they would normally do. When we’re older, and that sort of thing happens, we may not pin it on the underlying disease process.”

 

“Old age” was more useful some decades back, when medical professions had less knowledge and fewer diagnostic tools at their disposal to arrive at a conclusive diagnosis. Yet dying “from old age” has remained a persistent summary. For years, the World Health Organization (WHO) included “old age” as a cause of death in their International Classification of Diseases (ICD) data manual. The term wasn’t retired in the ICD until 2022, when WHO substituted it with “aging-associated biological decline in intrinsic capacity.”

 

But the fact remains that such a label is used not in the absence of a real cause, just in the absence of determining one. This is often due to a lack of information rather than a lack of curiosity: In a patient with several co-morbidities, for example, the ultimate contributor to their death may not be clear.

 

Not all cultures shy from relying on old age as a catch-all term. In Japan, rōsui, or decline associated with old age, was the third leading cause of death in 2021. “We would say these days, ‘She had all sorts of conditions but since she was old, let’s say she died of old age,’” gerontologist Akihisa Iguchi told The Wall Street Journal in 2022. One Japanese physician told the outlet he lists rōsui on half the death certificates he signs each year.

 

It's more accurate to state someone died at an advanced age rather than of an advanced age, though perhaps some families may prefer the vague term when there’s little sense in pinpointing the exact cause. It’s also a way to avoid the often-grim realty of what actually defeats us, from heart disease to pneumonia. When Queen Elizabeth II passed in 2022, the cause given was “old age.” Her actual cause of death has never been publicly revealed.

 

 

Source: Do People Really Die of ‘Old Age’?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - DOOMSDAY GLACIER

Did you know.... Future generations will likely suffer from the loss of West Antartica’s Thwaites Glacier about 200 years from now.

 

Climate change gives us plenty to worry about, from air pollution to seafood contaminated with flesh-eating bacteria. Sea levels are also at the mercy of of our warming planet. In fact, years of research show that Antarctica’s Thwaites Glacier, a.k.a the “Doomsday Glacier,” will likely be gone by the 23rd century, drastically increasing water levels worldwide.

 

Scientists have been studying the ice mass since 2018 as part of the International Thwaites Glacier Collaboration (ITGC). They met at the British Antarctic Survey (BAS) in Cambridge, UK, in September 2024 to share their discoveries. 

 

Dr. Rob Larter, British Antarctic Survey marine geophysicist and ITGC researcher, said in a statement, “Thwaites has been retreating for more than 80 years, accelerating considerably over the past 30 years, and our findings indicate it is set to retreat further and faster.” The scientists were able to determine this using technology such as underwater robots and predictive computer models.

 

Spanning 80 miles from edge to edge, Thwaites is the widest glacier on Earth, and its area is larger than England, Wales, and Northern Ireland. It is also over 6500 feet thick in some spots. If the gigantic ice river were to completely collapse, it would cause global sea levels to rise by 25 inches. This would be a major catastrophic event, hence the nickname “Doomsday Glacier.”

 

According to the ITGC, the shrinking body already contributes about 4 percent to global sea level rise. Higher sea levels means increased flooding, erosion, and the loss of homes in densely populated coastal areas.

 

”It’s concerning that the latest computer models predict continuing ice loss that will accelerate through the 22nd century and could lead to a widespread collapse of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet in the 23rd,” Dr. Ted Scambos, the ITGC’s U.S. science coordinator and a glaciologist at the University of Colorado, said in a statement. “Immediate and sustained climate intervention will have a positive effect, but a delayed one, particularly in moderating the delivery of warm deep ocean water that is the main driver of retreat.”     

 

 

Source: Scientists Say Antarctica’s ‘Doomsday Glacier’ Could Be Gone Within 200 Years

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - BLINK

Did you know.... The average adult blinks about 15 times a minute, whether to lubricate the eyes, clear unwanted irritants, or refocus attention. Babies, on the other hand, blink far less often — only two to three blinks per minute on average. So, why do infants blink less than adults? The answer may lie with our brain’s dopamine levels, which control human blinking. Scientists initially made connections between this feel-good neurotransmitter and blinking because people with schizophrenia, who usually have excess dopamine production, may blink more frequently. The inverse is also true — Parkinson’s disease, caused by damaged dopamine-producing neurons, makes people blink less often. So a baby’s infrequent blinking may be a clue about how the brain forms after we’re born, showing that a baby’s dopamine system is likely still forming and thus impacting blinking frequency. 

 

However, dopamine production is only one piece of the mystery. Scientists also theorize that because a baby’s eyes are small, they likely require less lubrication than adult peepers. Babies may also blink less often because it’s actually pretty demanding to be a baby, requiring more active attention to gather the necessary visual information for survival (and thus leaving less energy for blinking). So while babies may seem like pint-sized layabouts, they’re actually putting in a lot of work to become functioning and frequently blinking members of society. 

 

Blinking neurologically resets our brain.
Blinking is vitally important for the healthy upkeep of our eyes, but it also gives our brain a much-needed rest throughout the day. In 2012, scientists from the University of Osaka observed participants as they watched a television show by recording their blinks at 600 frames per second. When the TV scene changed or actors exited the frame, subjects would often blink. Scientists theorized that this blinking activated a “default mode network” causing sections of the brain associated with attention to temporarily shut down. This brief mental reprieve explains a variety of behaviors involved with blinking, including why humans tend to nictitate far more than mere lubrication requires. Blinking essentially allows the human brain to refocus, and this momentary suppression of attention — which also switches off the visual system — is why humans have little to no perception of blinking at all.

 

 

Source: Babies blink less than adults.

[DarkRavie]

Fact off the Day - MYSTERIOUS BLACK TOMBSTONE

Did you know... Scientists examined microscopic fossils in the tombstone and suggest the jet-black slab with an English knight’s insignia could have come only from one place.

 

The oldest surviving tombstone in the United States—a black limestone slab from 1627 that once bore the insignia of an English knight—was rediscovered at the site of Virginia’s Jamestown colony in 1901. Now, research published in the International Journal of Historical Archaeology indicates that it the stone was probably made in Belgium, imported to London, and shipped to the colony in the early 1600s.

 

Jamestown, the first permanent English settlement in the Americas, existed from 1607 to 1699. Due to harsh conditions, starvation, a few mass abandonments, and being set on fire during a rebellion, the government moved the colony’s capital to Williamsburg, leaving behind a wealth of scattered objects, bones, and ruins for archaeologists to piece together.

 

Carved depressions indicated the tombstone, which was designed to lay flat over a grave, once held emblems of a shield, an unfurled scroll, and an armored man, all indicating a British knight—and who was buried beneath was never much of a mystery. Two knighted individuals died in Jamestown: Sir Thomas West in 1618 and Sir George Yeardley in 1627. Both were one-time governors of the Virginia colony. Records from England show that, about 50 years after the tombstone was installed, Yeardley’s step-grandson, also a knight, purchased a tombstone for himself with identical inscription. Historians are pretty sure it’s Yeardley.

 

However, the tombstone’s material looked nothing like what was available locally. Some historians and archaeologists assumed, naturally, it had come from England. But the team behind the new study examined microfossils within the limestone and found six species of single-cell organisms, called foraminifera, that had lived 346 to 330 million years ago—only in the area that became Belgium.

 

The authors write that jet-black Belgian stone that resembled marble was in fashion for memorials and tombstones among the UK aristocracy. “Successful Virginia colonists who had lived in London would have been familiar with the latest English fashions and tried to replicate these in the colonies,” they suggest.

 

Source: Jamestown’s Mysterious Black Tombstone Originated in Belgium, Archaeologists Say

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - WOOLLY MAMMOTH ACTION FIGURE

Did you know... This mammoth is pretty portable. 

 

The long-rumored resurrection of the woolly mammoth is close to happening, but it won’t necessarily involve DNA or complex ethical questions. These mammoths will be recreated at 1:18 scale, in plastic, and for educational purposes. Eons, a PBS Digital Studios production, is teaming up with educational hub Complexly and action figure house Creative Beast Studio to unveil a collectible that doubles as a learning tool.

 

The snugly-coated woolly mammoth, or Mammuthus primigenius, once stood 13 feet tall. Its smaller plastic counterpart is 9 inches tall, 14 inches long (including tusks), and has 24 points of articulation. The mammoth was designed by paleoartist Ross Persichetti to ensure scientific accuracy. It also comes with three interchangeable tusks: one male, one female, and one damaged from locking up with a peer.

 

 

“There is enthusiastic demand for high quality, realistic action figures of extinct fauna, and it’s an honor to work with PBS Eons and Complexly to create the first proboscidean action figure line of my career,” Creative Beast Studio founder David Silva said in a statement. “With these woolly mammoths, we’re transporting the engaging, educational content from Eons directly into the hands and hearts of viewers. Built using data from the latest scientific discoveries and painted with colors inspired by modern-day creatures living in similar environments, we know that fans will love this line of prehistoric proboscideans.” 

 

The team behind the action figure is using crowdfunding site BackerKit to finance the project via a preorder approach. Those pledging $200 will receive just the mammoth. For $225, donors will get exclusive, snow-dusted variants of the adult mammoth and its 3.5-inch-long baby. A $55 pledge buys you a smaller mammoth at 1:35 scale (7.5 inches long and 4.25 inches tall), and $35 nets you the calf. (You can also donate as little as $1, but there will be no mammoths for you.)

 

The fundraiser is more than two-thirds of the way toward its $185,000 goal as of this writing. The mammoths are expected to ship in late spring of 2025.

 

As for the real thing: Woolly mammoths marched into extinction 10,000 years ago, but some scientists say resurrection is possible via fossilized chromosomes. The genes giving the mammoth its district traits, like its fluffy coat, could be inserted into the genome of their close counterpart, the African elephant, to act as a surrogate. It may not be an exact match, but it would be close enough to spark both amazement and controversy. Some critics believe reversing nature’s course could result in franken-animals or invasive species.

 

Fortunately, the plastic mammoth poses no such dangers—aside from the one to your wallet.

 

 

Source: PBS’s Woolly Mammoth Action Figure Recreates the Majestic Beast at 1:18 Scale

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - LINGUINE VS. GETTUCCINE VS. SPAGHETTI

Did you know.... The type of long noodle you use actually does make a difference.

 

Standing in the pasta aisle can be a surefire way to experience a decision-paralysis episode. There are hundreds of varieties, and to the untrained eye, it can feel a bit like choosing between “dusty rose” and “rose gold” paint swatches.

 

It can even be tough to distinguish the difference between three of the classics: linguine, fettuccine, and spaghetti. Below, we break down what sets these noodles apart, and why the distinction can make a big difference in your dish.

 

Linguine

Linguine, which means “little tongues” in Italian, is a long, flat noodle. Wider than spaghetti but narrower than fettuccine, it has a smooth, flat surface that pairs well with light, delicate sauces like pesto. It doesn’t overpower the ingredients it’s often paired with, which makes it a solid choice for dishes where you want your sauce to shine.

 

Fettuccine

Fettuccine’s name—which translates to “little ribbons”—tells us a lot about its shape. The pasta is broad and generally 1/4-inch thick; it’s about twice as wide as linguine. The wide, flat shape makes fettuccine a great vessel for heavier sauces, especially creamy ones like Alfredo or a meaty bolognese. 

 

Spaghetti

Even if you aren’t familiar with linguine or fettuccine, spaghetti is a noodle you’ve certainly seen before. Spaghetti is the most popular pasta shape (and it’s also one of the easiest to industrially manufacture). Unlike fettuccine and linguine, this pasta is not flat, and is instead cylindrical. Its long, thin shape is perfect for twirling around on your fork. Because it lacks the thickness of broader shapes like fettuccine, spaghetti is best paired with lighter sauces like marinara, carbonara, or even a simple combination of garlic and olive oil. 

 

How to Choose the Right Pasta Shape
Choosing between the three above pasta types boils down to the kind of dish you want to create, as the shape will affect the desired outcome. If you’re making a lighter sauce or looking for something to pair with veggies or seafood, consider linguine. But if you want a heavy, hearty sauce, then fettuccine will be a better choice. And if you’re looking for some classic Italian American comfort food, then you can’t go wrong with spaghetti and meatballs.

 

 

Source: Linguine vs. Fettuccine vs. Spaghetti: What’s the Difference?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - PHRASE ORIGIN

Did you know.... The phrase made famous by ‘Good Will Hunting’ is much older than the 1997 film—and doesn’t have anything to do with actual apples.

 

In the 1997 hit film Good Will Hunting, local guy Chuckie (Ben Affleck) walks up to a Harvard student at the bar and tells her remembers her from his history class. The audience knows it’s a lie—Chuckie is a working man who never went to college, let alone an Ivy League school—but the girl doesn’t. That is, until cocky grad student Clark comes over and puts Chuckie on the spot. 

 

“History?” he asks. “Just ‘history’? It must have been a survey course, then.” 

 

Clark laughs at Chuckie’s expense, but his move backfires when Chuckie’s friend Will (Matt Damon) comes to the rescue. Although he’s a janitor and an ex-con, Will is secretly a self-taught genius capable of reading the densest, most cerebral academic books in under an hour, and his knowledge of Clark’s forte, economics, sends the grad student running with his tail between his legs. 

 

After the girl, Skylar (Minnie Driver), gives Will her number, the genius goes after Clark to deliver the final blow. Holding up the piece of paper to his face, he delivers one of the most iconic and memorable lines from the entire film: “How do ya like them apples?!” 

 

 

 

Although Good Will Hunting is widely credited for embedding this ubiquitous phrase into the American vernacular, it’s far from the first film to feature this snappy line of dialogue.

 

The Oxford English Dictionary defines the colloquial phrase as being similar to “how do you like that?,” and notes that it is “frequently used as a jeer or taunt, implying that the thing referred to will be unwelcome.”

 

As journalist Guy Howie notes in the film magazine Far Out, Jack Nicholson’s character in Chinatown (1974) used the same words to taunt one of his adversaries. Screenwriter Robert Towne, in turn, might have gotten the phrase from Howard Hawks’s 1959 western Rio Bravo, in which the characters are tossing “toffee apple” bombs at one another. 

 

Howie suggests how do you like them apples may have originated around the First World War, when British “toffee apple” bombs—a small, long-range projectile shot from a 2-inch mortar—were invented. However, the OED cites sources that are older still. “I knew them better and saw them in action more often than ‘Mr. Smith,’” someone told a reporter from the Oakland Tribune in 1941, “How do like them apples, Smithy old boy?”

 

The OED found the first-known use of the phrase all the way back in 1895, in a September issue of Texas’s Bryan Eagle: “Bryan is the best cotton market in this section of the state and has received more cotton than any other town in this section. How do you like ‘them apples’?”

 

 

Source: Where Does the Phrase ‘How Do You Like Them Apples’ Come From?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the day - FLIGHTLESS SUPERMAN

Did you know.... Since his 1938 debut in Action Comics No. 1, Superman has evolved into an even more powerful superhero than the original character. While he’s always been super strong and super fast, he didn’t initially have his now-famous ability to fly. You’ve probably heard the slogan “able to leap tall buildings in a single bound” — that comes from his ability to jump an eighth of a mile at a time, which is originally as close as he came to being able to fly.

 

The first implied instance of Superman taking flight was on an August 1939 cover of the British magazine Triumph, where the superhero appears to be flying into space. It was also hinted at in the second episode of The Adventures of Superman radio program in 1940. Then came artist Leo Nowak, who, assuming the hero had been given the power of flight, mistakenly drew Superman hovering above the ground in 1941’s Superman No. 10, which some now consider to be the first example of the character midflight. Funnily enough, Nowak was also the first to portray the villainous Lex Luthor as bald (earlier drawings depicted him as having red hair).

 

Superman officially gained the ability to fly in 1941’s The Mad Scientist, the first of 17 animated shorts from Fleischer Studios. The studio found it challenging to animate Superman’s leaping ability and asked DC Studios’ permission to make the character fly, which was easier to portray. (The request was granted.) In the comics, the first formal mention of this ability came in 1944’s Superman No. 30. While chasing a character named Mr. Mxyzptlk through the sky, Superman quips, “I thought I was the only one who could fly!!”

 

Superman was originally conceived as a villain.
Superman wasn’t always the goody two-shoes we know him to be today; in fact, the original version was a villainous character. In January 1933, comic book writer Jerry Siegel published a short story titled “The Reign of the Superman” in an edition of Science Fiction. It centered around an evil supervillain with telepathic abilities who was dead set on world domination. The story also featured illustrations from Siegel’s friend and comic book artist Joe Shuster, but it wasn’t the smash hit they hoped it to be. In the wake of Adolf Hitler’s rise to power that same year, Siegel, who was Jewish, reimagined the “super man” as a force for good. The duo got to work on a new comic featuring the Superman character as a hero. The pair struggled in shopping around the idea until 1938, when DC Comics finally purchased the inaugural Superman story.

 

 

Source: Superman originally couldn’t fly.

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - NOVELLA VS SHORT STORY

Did you know... As Stephen King once said, novellas are “too long to be short and too short to be really long.”

 

We typically put fiction into one of two categories: It’s either a short story, or it’s a novel. But there is another variation that lands somewhere in between the two. Yes, the novella. What exactly separates a short story from a novella from a novel, you ask?

 

As with most art forms, the label is somewhat malleable. When it comes down to it, though, it’s all about word count. Atonement author Ian McEwan, discussing his love of the form in in 2012, defined the novella as being between roughly 20,000 and 40,000 words. Around 30,000 is typical.

 

Anything more than 50,000 words is probably a full novel. Short stories, which are designed to be read in one sitting, are usually only a few thousand words long and written for publication in a magazine or as part of a collection. The highest word count many literary magazines will publish is around 10,000, but most stories are even shorter, under 7500 words or so.

 

This leaves the novella in a weird in-between space where it’s too long to publish in a magazine or literary journal and too short to publish as a book. (Yes, there’s another in-between category for those stories between 10,000 and 20,000 words: the “novelette.”) For publishers, putting out a novella isn’t a very attractive option. Novellas look pretty small once they’re bound, and customers aren’t always keen on spending hardcover prices for teeny-tiny volumes.

 

Some of the difference between the forms is just marketing, though. Novellas have been around since the Middle Ages, and some standard English class assignments are on the list. Even if you don’t know it, you’ve surely read one, probably thinking that it was just an extra-long short story or a rather short book. Perhaps it was Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness, or Charles Dickens’s A Christmas Carol, or Franz Kafka’s The Metamorphosis. Maybe it was Edith Wharton’s Ethan Frome or H.G. Wells’s The Time Machine. All can be classified as novellas.

 

Despite the fact that these novellas turned into classics, you probably don’t see a lot of contemporary examples at your local bookstore. Even the most popular writers have trouble finding a publisher willing to take on their in-between length stories. Stephen King, for example, struggled to get them out into the world until he finally published Different Seasons, a collection of four of his novellas, in 1982. And that had nothing to do with the quality of those stories; one was later adapted for the screen as The Shawshank Redemption.

 

In the afterword to the book, King wrote of the trouble he faced getting the novellas published because they were “too long to be short and too short to be really long.” When he pitched his editor on a book of novellas, King recalled, the editor was polite, but “his voice says some of the joy may have just gone out of his day.” In the end, he got the book published, but even for a hugely popular author, it was an uphill battle. Even for the biggest names in publishing, it seems, the novella is a no-go.

 

But that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t seek them out; according to McEwan, they’re the “perfect form of prose fiction.” Even if they go on a little longer than 10,000 words.

 

Source: Novella vs. Short Story: What’s the Difference?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - GHOST STORIES

Did you know... We dive into the psychology behind why people are drawn to such terrifying tales.

 

Gathering around a campfire to share bone-chilling ghost stories is a classic camping ritual. These tales can induce nightmares, but some people can’t get enough of them. What is it about scary ghost stories that has captivated humanity for thousands of years?

 

Why We Love Ghost Stories
There are several possible reasons why people tell ghost stories. One explanation is that our fear of the unknown makes these tales appealing. We don’t understand much about death and the afterlife, making supernatural stories terrifying yet intriguing. And when made to be sinister antagonists, ghosts become more menacing and, thus, more fascinating.

 

Various versions of spirits appear in cultures throughout the world, but the idea of a being that haunts someone or somewhere is a particularly Western concept. According to anthropologist Carie Hersh, these scary depictions of ghosts may reflect society’s discomfort and trauma surrounding conversations about death. “We tend to have a lot of rituals around death, and some of that is to enact a sense of control over this ultimately unknowable transition,” she told Northeastern Global News in 2023.

 

As existential psychologist Clay Routledge explained to the John Templeton Foundation in 2022, believing in the supernatural can also soothe our anxieties about mortality. Although becoming a wandering spirit may not sound appealing, some may view ghost stories as explanations of what can happen after death; they answer existential questions and offer possibilities about a phenomenon that isn’t widely understood.

 

The Science Behind Our Fascination with Horror
Many of us want stimulation from horror, whether we’re reading Stephen King novels or watching Wes Craven movies. As Haiyang Yang and Kuangjie Zhang wrote for the Harvard Business Review, seeing or anticipating something scary can stimulate people negatively (with fear or anxiety) or positively (through excitement or joy). Horror provides both sensations simultaneously, with the most frightening moment unleashing the most pleasure. Fear can also cause adrenaline rushes—people experience boosts in energy and sensations in the “fight or flight” mindset, which might leave them wanting more.

 

The concept of a “protective frame” can also be applied to people’s ability to enjoy horror. The protective frame can be divided into three categories: the safety frame, detachment, and a sense of control. 

 

The safety frame is about understanding that an entity in a story or movie cannot harm us, while detachment refers to the skill of mentally disconnecting oneself from the moment of horror because one knows it’s not real. The last category applies to controlling the scary things you’re exposed to—it’s easier to enjoy something terrifying if you’re managing the situation and are sure you can overcome it.

 

This psychological concept prevents people from allowing fear to take over and reminds them that it’s temporary. As a result, they can be OK with—or perhaps even enjoy—seeing terrifying things. Those without protective frames feel as though they are in danger when witnessing something scary and don’t want to experience the discomfort again.

 

Source: Why Do We Tell Scary Ghost Stories?

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - OCTOBER

Did you know.... Octagon, octopus… most words that begin with the Latin prefix “Oct” have some connection to the number eight. But what about October? While the modern calendar considers the autumn month to be the 10th of the year, it wasn’t always that way. For the ancient Romans, who created the earliest form of the calendar we use now, October was originally the eighth month.

 

Today’s calendar follows a 12-month cycle, though the earliest iterations only had 10 months. In ancient Rome, the year began in March and ran through December, with the first four months named for Roman deities. The next six months had more straightforward, numerical names that referenced their place in the year. The remaining weeks of winter (which would eventually become January and February) were largely ignored on paper; when the harvest season ended, so did the calendar, until the next spring planting season rolled around.

 

Over time, the calendar expanded by two months; January and February were added around 700 BCE, and by about the middle of the fifth century BCE, they had become the starting months of the year. When Julius Caesar introduced the Julian calendar, he didn’t adjust the number-named months to more appropriate places, though later Roman emperors tried, using names that didn’t stick. Domitian, who ruled from 81 to 96 CE, called October “Domitianus” after himself, and decades later, Commodus dubbed the month “Herculeus” after one of his own titles. Some historians believe the attempts to rename October (and the other months of the year) were widely disregarded because the leaders themselves were generally disliked, though another theory might explain it best: Like many people today, Romans of the past just weren’t fans of change.

 

There was a year when October only had 21 days.
Eager trick-or-treaters counting down to Halloween know October has 31 days, though there was a time in history when the month ran 10 days short. In 1582, Pope Gregory XIII introduced the Gregorian calendar, an upgrade from the Julian calendar that had fallen 10 days out of sync and was thus messing with the timing of religious holidays. Switching to the new calendar fixed the issue, but it required a one-time drop of 10 days to get back on track. The pope decreed the calendar would skip them in October, the month with the fewest holy days. After October 4, the calendar jumped to October 15, omitting the days in between and causing a flurry of issues: Some citizens in Frankfurt rioted against the change, many countries delayed or refused to swap to the new calendar, and participating regions had to recalculate rents and wages for the shortened month. Over the next few centuries, most countries around the globe adopted the Gregorian calendar, though some held out longer than others. Greece became the last European country to officially adopt the calendar, in 1923.

 

Source: October was originally the eighth month.

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - PIZZA FUNURAL?

Did you know.... On March 5, 1973, several hundred people gathered at a farm in tiny Ossineke, Michigan, to witness a burial they would remember for the rest of their lives. One local grocery store closed its doors so employees could attend; even Michigan Governor William G. Milliken dropped by to pay his respects. Was this a funeral for a native son who made good, or perhaps a beloved civic leader? No, it was a ceremony to bid arrivederci to some 30,000 frozen pizzas that may have been harboring dangerous toxins.

 

This bizarre scene stemmed from the discovery of swollen mushroom tins at Ohio's United Canning Company two months earlier. After FDA tests revealed the presence of bacteria that causes botulism, calls to United Canning's extended branch of customers eventually reached frozen-pizza maker Mario Fabbrini. When two test mice croaked after eating his mushroom pizza, Fabbrini believed he had no choice but to recall his wares from store shelves and swallow the estimated $60,000 in losses. Attempting the pizza equivalent of turning lemons into lemonade, he announced intentions for a grand "funeral," and arranged for a series of pickup trucks to dump his 30,000 unwanted mushroom pies into an 18-foot hole. After placing a flower garland on the grave — red gladioli to symbolize sauce, white carnations for cheese — Fabbrini served fresh (mushroom-free) pizza to anyone brave enough to partake.

 

Further tests later showed that the mice had died not from botulism, but from peritonitis, and it was unclear whether their deaths were pizza-related casualties. Sadly, the $250,000 Fabbrini later won in a lawsuit against United Canning and two other defendants wasn’t enough to fully revive his business, and Fabbrini sold the company in the early 1980s. Nevertheless, much like that sauce stain that never entirely disappears from your shirt, the story of the Great Michigan Pizza Funeral endures for those who know where to look. 

 

Atari once buried truckloads of its inventory, including a notoriously awful "E.T." video game.
Video gamers of a certain age may remember the disaster that was “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial,” an Atari 2600 game based on the blockbuster Steven Spielberg movie. Given just five weeks to have the game in stores by the 1982 Christmas season, designer Howard Scott Warshaw developed an ambitious but deeply flawed product, resulting in a poorly reviewed title that contributed to the company’s $563 million in losses in 1983. That September, Atari deposited 13 truckloads of various game cartridges and computer equipment into the city landfill at Alamogordo, New Mexico. Although contemporary newspapers reported on the event, the legend that lingered was that of Atari secretly dumping their unsold “E.T.” inventory under the cover of darkness to bury the memory of what some called the worst video game ever made. In April 2014, the landfill was excavated as part of the making of the documentary Atari: Game Over; it was called “the first excavation of video games in the history of humanity.” Cartridges of the “E.T.” game were found alongside other titles, such as “Pac-Man” and “Centipede,” as well as decrepit computer parts. Yet unlike Mario Fabbrini and his mushroom pizzas, this story has a happy ending: The sale of items retrieved in the landfill helped raise more than $100,000 for the city of Alamogordo, and Warshaw earned a measure of redemption by receiving a standing ovation after Atari: Game Over screened at Comic-Con that year.

 

 

Source: A Michigan town once held a funeral for 30,000 pizzas.

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - HAPPY CRYER?

Did you know... Although crying to make yourself happier seems counterintuitive, shedding some tears can be one of the best ways to restore your emotional equilibrium. A 2014 study found that emotional crying activates the parasympathetic nervous system, which regulates the body’s “rest and digest” actions. Crying also elevates levels of endorphins and oxytocin, which helps dull both emotional and physical pain. And the physical act of crying — taking in big gulps of air — cools the brain and helps regulate your mood. All in all, “having a good cry” can actually be good for you.

 

Of course, whether crying makes you feel better can also be dependent on the situation. Tears are known to inspire interpersonal benefits by signaling to others that you’re in need of support. Unsurprisingly, studies have shown that people who receive support after crying are more likely to feel happier than if they’re shamed for crying. So while the physical act of crying can help our bodies return to an emotional homeostasis, it’s the support of friends and loved ones that makes those good feelings stick. 

 

Humans tear up when laughing because it’s physiologically similar to crying.
Although crying is often associated with sadness, tears are actually a complex biological response — after all, humans also shed tears of joy. Evidence suggests that the same part of the brain controls both laughing and crying; some of this evidence comes from studies that have shown that patients with a condition known as pseudobulbar affect (PBA) experience both uncontrollable bouts of crying and laughter caused by lesions located on a specific part of the brain. Although scientists aren’t 100% certain why people cry when they’re laughing, one prevailing theory is that in both instances the body is attempting to regulate a high emotional state and simply doesn’t discriminate between immense sadness and immense joy.

 

 

Source: Crying can make you happier.

[DarkRavie]

Fact of the Day - GRAVEYARD VS CEMETERY

Did you know... Eventually, we’re all going to end up in a graveyard. Or is that a cemetery? What’s the difference, anyway?

 

These days, the answer is “not much.” Both are places where we bury the dearly departed, and the words are often used interchangeably. But that hasn’t always been the case—in fact, the words’ meanings have sort of flip-flopped.

 

The Big Switch
Cemetery is the older of the two words; it’s derived from the Latin coemētērium and first appeared in the mid-1400s. According to the Oxford English Dictionary (OED), it “Originally applied to the Roman underground cemeteries or catacombs,” or galleries with tombs for bodies along the sides. The first known use from J. Capgrave’s Abbreuiacion of Cronicles, is just barely legible today: “Anicetus ... was biried in the cymytery of Kalixt.”

 

 

Over time, the meaning of cemetery shifted from the underground catacombs to burial grounds closer to the surface, and by 1485, it had come to refer to the consecrated ground next to a church, a.k.a. a churchyard (a usage that, per the OED, is now obsolete). Since the 1600s, cemetery has referred to a more general burial ground, particularly “a large public park or ground laid out expressly for the interment of the dead, and not being the ‘yard’ of any church,” according to the OED. Think of places like Paris’s Pere Lachaise or Brooklyn’s Green-wood Cemetery, which were both planned with the express purpose of serving as burial grounds for large amounts of people, no matter their religious inclination.

 

 

Graveyard is a newer word, and was initially a much more religiously neutral one: When it first popped up in English in the mid-1700s, it simply meant “a burial ground.” The OED pinpoints 1767 as its first use, when it appeared in P. V. Fithian’s  Journal & Letters: “He meant it for a Satire upon the neglect of the people in suffering their Grave-Yard to lie common.”

 

While “burial ground” remains the OED’s sole meaning for graveyard, other sources—including some funeral providers, Dictionary.com, and the Huffington Post—say that these days, the word refers to smaller burial areas near churches. As Titan Casket puts it, “Graveyards are often associated with churches and are thus always located on church grounds. Owing to land limitations, graveyards tend to be smaller in size, and are, therefore, more challenging to secure. In most cases, graveyards only allow members of the same religion, and more specifically, the same church, to be buried on their premises.”

 

A Graveyard of Metaphors
The biggest difference between cemetery and graveyard—at least, linguistically speaking—may be that the latter is used more often in metaphors. Since the mid-1800s, examples have been found in print of figurative graveyards, as the term has proven an apt signifier of final resting places of all sorts. A 1969 use in The Daily Telegraph is typical of this sense: “The M1 motorway was a graveyard of cars abandoned across all six lanes.”

 

 

Such comparisons are very common, as seen in recent news stories that refer to a “graveyard of unique architecture,” “the graveyard of empires,” a “Halloween Graveyard for QB Victims,” a “graveyard of bottles,” a “graveyard of education,” and a movie described as a “Graveyard of Loose Ends.”

 

There’s also graveyard shift, a somewhat spooky term for a portion of a job performed at night. That term is first found in a 1907 issue of Collier’s: “From the saloons came the clink of the chips. For it was the ‘grave~yard gamblers’ shift... The small hours of the morning ... are theirs.”

Source: Graveyard vs. Cemetery: What’s the Difference?