uriaheep Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 My carrots go green if left in the pan too long!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accounting Troll Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 I'm like that when I'm cooking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uriaheep Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 Oh - I go burnt umber when cooking - except when cooking for guests then I go red. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullAuto Posted November 25, 2005 Share Posted November 25, 2005 If you have a vindaloo after one too many beers, you will shit yourself inside out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivory Posted November 26, 2005 Author Share Posted November 26, 2005 charmed full auto! charmmed as for the carrots turnign you yellow thng, some girl did that with SUNNY DELIGHT, she drank so muchof it her skin turned yellow HA HA HA 'mary poppins' and 'the sound of music' have both had long running plays on british christmas time telly as for how the world was made- i quite like not really knowing, gives it a bit of interest doesnt it, spices things up a bit! if you get to know exactally whats happeneing in what order would it not be a REALLY boring ride? top tip on genetic engenering watch 'gattaca' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir-roosio Posted November 26, 2005 Share Posted November 26, 2005 Rather like the art of Van Gogh; the films of Uwe Boll will not be appreciated in his own lifetime. Unlike the art of Van Gogh, they won't be appreciated in anyone elses lifetime. If you pushed a cow out of an Aeroplane at 42,000 ft, the methane in it stomach would equalise its body weight in the thinner air and it would float. Unfortunately it would suffocate. Even more unfortunately, the weight of an oxygen tank would upset this balance. At the end of the film ET did not go straight home, he had to stop at the shops for a pint of milk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uriaheep Posted November 26, 2005 Share Posted November 26, 2005 At the end of the film ET did not go straight home, he had to stop at the shops for a pint of milk. That can't be true - he had no pockets for small change. I was told he had to use the toilet which obviously caused the delay. If you have a vindaloo after one too many beers, you will shit yourself inside out. I did that once - the upside was that the following night I went to a fancy dress party as a Vogon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accounting Troll Posted November 26, 2005 Share Posted November 26, 2005 As some of you know, every summer solstice a lot of New Age types welcome the dawning of the sun at Stonehenge. Despite what they think, people in pre-Christian times regarded the Winter Solstice as being more significant - Christmas originated from this festival. I suppose that in December it is too cold out on Salisbury Plain to consider communing with Nature Also, several antiqarians tidied up Stonehenge over the last couple of centuries as all those stones lying around looked untidy. We should therefore be careful when considering the astronomical alignments of Stonehenge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matri Posted November 26, 2005 Share Posted November 26, 2005 If you pushed a cow out of an Aeroplane at 42,000 ft, the methane in it stomach would equalise its body weight in the thinner air and it would float. Unfortunately it would suffocate. Even more unfortunately, the weight of an oxygen tank would upset this balance.... I'm almost afraid to ask... This wouldn't be first-hand information, would it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Bob Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 It's not true. I pushed my last girlfriend out of a plane, and she went STRAIGHT down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernel Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 If you pushed a cow out of an Aeroplane at 42,000 ft, the methane in it stomach would equalise its body weight in the thinner air and it would float. Unfortunately it would suffocate. Even more unfortunately, the weight of an oxygen tank would upset this balance. Wouldn't the methane... uhh... leak, out the cows rear end? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accounting Troll Posted November 27, 2005 Share Posted November 27, 2005 Now a jet propelled cow would REALLY be worth seeing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivory Posted November 28, 2005 Author Share Posted November 28, 2005 wouldnt liketo be under that flight path! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Bob Posted November 28, 2005 Share Posted November 28, 2005 It's just a refinement of an old weapon. In the dark ages, sick and dying cattle were propelled into castles, villages, and cities by sieging armies with catapults. We're just improving the idea by jamming a rocket in it's arse and shooting it in with better accuracy. Now to keep in line with the topic... Poland Springs water does NOT come Poland. It comes from Maine, a northeastern state in the U.S. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uriaheep Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 It's just a refinement of an old weapon. In the dark ages, sick and dying cattle were propelled into castles, villages, and cities by sieging armies with catapults. That's right, the machine was actually called a 'Trebuchet' and the idea was that dead and rotting corpses would spread disease. I guess that a self propelled cow would have been more efficient and kinder to the local forest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivory Posted November 29, 2005 Author Share Posted November 29, 2005 oh i just love copy write! i tell you what REALY REALY anoys me (dont laff)... fitted sheets. i mean teh ones you get on beds. ok, surely if its called a 'FITTED' sheet it shoudl FIT! grrr this really winds me up when it goes all wrinkly underneath you. am i the only one who is annoyed by this??? :mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strong Bob Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 That's right, the machine was actually called a 'Trebuchet' and the idea was that dead and rotting corpses would spread disease. I guess that a self propelled cow would have been more efficient and kinder to the local forest. I was under the impression that a Trebuchet and a Catapult were two different devices... Meh, I'd have to look it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accounting Troll Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 I'm fairly sure that trebuchets were used to demolish battlements on castle walls and not the enture castle wall - catapults and mangonels were used for that. People didn't stop at diseased cattle in medieval warfare. When William Marshal was a boy, his father's castle was besieged by King Stephen. As the boy was a prisoner of the king, William's father was told that unless he surrendured, the boy would be used as catapult ammunition. The father curtly replied that he had "the hammer and anvils to make more and better sons." There is a happy ending - the king couldn't go through with it and William Marshal entered his service instead. EDIT: The phrase 'hoist by his own petard' comes from a 16th-17th century gunpowder weapon called a petard that was used in seige warfare. The assistant petardier (a senior petardier was a valuble craftsman) would carry what was effectively a bomb to the enemy gate, plant it and ry to run away before it blew up. The ones who were not killed by the enemy fire were often killed when the petard was either ignited by a musket ball or blew up before he could get clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FullAuto Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 Trebuchets and catapults are different devices, though they're broadly similar. Confusingly enough, some people use the terms interchangably. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NKF Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 If I'm not mistaken, while they effectively perform the same thing, the method of storing and releasing the energy is different. The catapult works by storing all its energy in the same way a spring or a bow and arrow store its energy, with the force either in the string or the arm that's holding the projectile, and then releasing it to launch the projectile. The trebuchet uses a counterbalance that spins and effectively throws its projectile, a bit like a stone and sling, but perhaps with less spinning. Speaking of which, trebuchets were used as an early form of chemical warfare, by throwing disease ridden something or others (can't remember - flaming rotten dead animals/corpses/etc?) into the enemy encampment. Nasty stuff that. I know I'd be afraid if a flaming bovine were to land on my roof... - NKF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gimli Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 EDIT: The phrase 'hoist by his own petard' comes from a 16th-17th century gunpowder weapon called a petard that was used in seige warfare. The assistant petardier (a senior petardier was a valuble craftsman) would carry what was effectively a bomb to the enemy gate, plant it and ry to run away before it blew up. The ones who were not killed by the enemy fire were often killed when the petard was either ignited by a musket ball or blew up before he could get clear. We still call firecrackers petards in my country... well the word is actually "petarda". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Accounting Troll Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 I want to know if the words have the same origin. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, petard is a French word that made its way into the English language. It is a corruption of the word peter which means to break wind Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kernel Posted November 29, 2005 Share Posted November 29, 2005 It is a corruption of the word peter which means to break wind Hmm... wonder if Pete's real name is Peter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NKF Posted November 30, 2005 Share Posted November 30, 2005 Ah, etymology... Did you know: Back when the Gregorian calendar was first introduced that March was the first month of the year and that February was the last? It explains a lot of things, really. Why all the months alternate between 30 and 31 days, but February only has 28 and a quarter days (well, a day is added every four years). February is basically the leftovers, so to say. One other clue is that some of the months names that aren't based off names like Roman emperors (i.e. August = Augustus), look a bit odd where they are now. October - from Octo, or eight. December, Dec is decimal, or of 10. October is now the 10th month and December the 12th month. Somehow, we've been set back by two months. Hmm. A worldwide conspiracy where all clocks are slow by a nanosecond finally coming to fruition? I don't know. - NKF edit: Wait, sorry, I think I might have got the calendars mixed up. I think our current calendar is the Julian calendar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
uriaheep Posted November 30, 2005 Share Posted November 30, 2005 If I'm not mistaken, while they effectively perform the same thing, the method of storing and releasing the energy is different. The catapult works by storing all its energy in the same way a spring or a bow and arrow store its energy, with the force either in the string or the arm that's holding the projectile, and then releasing it to launch the projectile. The trebuchet uses a counterbalance that spins and effectively throws its projectile, a bit like a stone and sling, but perhaps with less spinning. Speaking of which, trebuchets were used as an early form of chemical warfare, by throwing disease ridden something or others (can't remember - flaming rotten dead animals/corpses/etc?) into the enemy encampment. Nasty stuff that. I know I'd be afraid if a flaming bovine were to land on my roof... - NKF Okay, here is a more accurate answer. Mangonels and catapults are direct fire weapons used to batter castle walls, ships, redouts etc. A trebuchet is a counter balance weapon used for indirect fire to go over the obsticle ie. into a castle or ship as the Greeks used them. They had a very slow rate of fire compared to direct fire weapons such as catapults. I included them in the catapult genre 'cos that's what they were more commonly called in the medieaval period. The Romans also had a catapult that threw a massive spear at great range and as stated the Greeks used them from inside their fortifications to attack ships. A group of us made a small one once as an experiment and it was quite good at throwing 2lb shot over the moat at Caerphilly Castle. - I have also heared of another repro built to toss a car over 200 yds. As to the French word for breaking wind, has anyone ever seen a movie with Leonard Rossiter as Le Petarmaine? (spelling could be wrong) Find it out - it's hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now