Little Bug thinks it's an Armadillo!

I used to call them Roly-Polies when I was younger and once witnessed the very unerving live birth of what seemed to be dozens of little Rolies on my parent’s coffee table. They also go by the names armadillo bug, potato bug, sow bug and a few other equally creative names.

Why are the weird to me?  They aren’t insects or even arachnids but are one of the few terrestrial (land) crustaceans. Yes they are actually little distant relatives of crabs and lobsters.  Anyways, lets get to the crazy-ass not-so-distant relatives:

1. Giant Isopod (of doom?)

A giant isopod may be one of approximately nine species of large isopods (crustaceans related to the shrimp and crabs) in the genus Bathynomus. They are thought to be abundant in cold, deep waters of the Atlantic. Bathynomus giganteus, the species upon which the generitype is based, is the largest known isopod and is the one most often referred to by the common name “giant isopod”.

Holy Shit! Big Roly-Poly!

French zoologist Alphonse Milne-Edwards was the first^[1] to describe the genus in 1879^[2] after fishing a juvenile male B. giganteus from the Gulf of Mexico; this was an exciting discovery for both scientists and the public, as at the time the idea of a lifeless or “azoic” deep ocean had only recently been refuted by the work of Sir Charles Wyville Thomson and others. Females were not recovered until 1891.

Giant isopods are of little interest to most commercial fisheries owing to the typical paucity of catches and because ensnared isopods are usually scavenged beyond marketability before they are recovered. However, in Northern Taiwan and other areas, they are not uncommon at seaside restaurants, served boiled and bisected with a clean lateral slice. The white meat, similar to crab or lobster in texture, is then easily removed. The few specimens caught in the Americas with baited traps are sometimes seen in public aquaria.

Maturing to a length between 19 and 37 cm (7.5 to 14.5 in)^[1], and maximally reaching a weight of approximately 1.7 kg (3 lb) in B. giganteus,^{[citation needed]} giant isopods are a good example of deep-sea gigantism (cf. giant squid); most other isopods range in size from 1–5 cm. Their morphology is nonetheless familiar to most people as giant isopods closely resemble their terrestrial cousin, the woodlouse: their bodies are dorso-ventrally compressed, protected by a rigid, calcareous exoskeleton composed of imbricate segments. The first of these segments is fused to the head; the most posterior segments are often fused as well, forming a “caudal shield” over the shortened abdomen (pleon) ^[1]. The large eyes are compound with nearly 4,000 facets, sessile and spaced far apart on the head ^[3]. There are two pairs of antennae.

The uniramous thoracic legs or pereiopods are arranged in seven pairs, the first of which are modified into maxillipeds to manipulate and bring food to the four sets of jaws. The abdomen has five segments called pleonites each with a pair of biramous pleopods; these are modified into natatory legs and rami, flat respiratory structures acting as gills. The isopods are a pale lilac in colour.

2. Cymothoa exigua - The Creepiest Crusty Ever

Cymothoa exigua is a parasitic crustacean of the family Cymothoidae. It tends to be 3 to 4 cm long. This parasite attaches itself at the base of the spotted rose snapper’s (Lutjanus guttatus) tongue, entering the fish’s mouth through its gills. It then proceeds to extract blood through the claws on its front three pairs of legs. As the parasite grows, less and less blood reaches the tongue, and eventually the organ atrophies from lack of blood.

Why God? Why?

The parasite then replaces the fish’s tongue by attaching its own body to the muscles of the tongue stub. The fish is able to use the parasite just like a normal tongue. It appears that the parasite does not cause any other damage to the host fish.^[1] Once C. exigua replaces the tongue, some feed on the host’s blood and many others feed on fish mucus. They do not eat scraps of the fish’s food.^[2] This is the only known case of a parasite functionally replacing a host organ.

And those are The Pillbug’s Crazy Cousins of the Deep!
As always, some text taken from wikipedia.

Kodak Disc Film

Disc film was a still-photography film format aimed at the consumer market, and introduced by Kodak in 1982.  The film was in the form of a flat disc, and was fully housed within a plastic cartridge. Each disc held 15 exposures, the disc being rotated 24° between each image. The fifteen 11 x 8 mm images themselves were arranged around the outside of the disc.

The system was primarily a consumer-oriented product, and most cameras were self-contained units with no expansion capability. The cameras were very simple to load and unload, and were generally completely automated. The cassette had a built-in dark slide to prevent stray light reaching the film when the disc was removed.

As the film was rotated on a disc instead of over a spool, the cassette was very thin, as were most of the cameras. The completely flat nature of the format also led to the (potential) advantage of greater sharpness over spool-based cassette formats (such as 110 and 126 film). Disc film has a very thick acetate base, comparable with 4×5″ sheet film, which holds the film much flatter than the other formats.

Disc film did not prove hugely successful, mainly because the image on the negative was only 11 mm by 8 mm, leading to generally unacceptable grain and poor definition in the final prints. The film was intended to be printed with special 6-element lenses from Kodak, but many labs simply printed discs with standard 3-element lenses used for larger negative formats. The resulting prints often disappointed the consumer.

The film was officially discontinued by the last manufacturer, Kodak, on December 31, 1999, though the cameras had disappeared from the market long before then.

There were several different manufacturers of Disc film. Kodak produced films throughout the complete lifespan of the format, but 3M, Konica and Fuji also produced Disc film. While Kodak film was always eponymous, 3M and Konica made Disc film for many third parties, branded with the retailers logo. As with most photographic film, the country of manufacture is the best giveaway to the make. Agfa never produced Disc film.

Kodak’s newest ideas with sharp fine-grained negative film were always tested in Disc format first, typically being one or two generations ahead of the equivalent 135 films.

via Disc film - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

As the name implies, hedge funds often seek to offset potential losses in the principal markets they invest in by hedging their investments using a variety of methods, most notably short selling. However, the term “hedge fund” has come to be applied to many funds that do not actually hedge their investments, and in particular to funds using short selling and other “hedging” methods to increase rather than reduce risk, with the expectation of increasing return.

Hedge funds are typically open only to a limited range of professional or wealthy investors. This provides them with an exemption in many jurisdictions from regulations governing short selling, derivative contracts, leverage, fee structures and the liquidity of interests in the fund. A hedge fund will typically commit itself to a particular investment strategy, investment types and leverage levels via statements in its offering documentation, thereby giving investors some indication of the nature of the fund.

The net asset value of a hedge fund can run into many billions of dollars, and this will usually be multiplied by leverage. Hedge funds dominate certain specialty markets such as trading within derivatives with high-yield ratings and distressed debt.

via Hedge fund - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

This fish is also known to attack humans and animals and swim into an orifice (the urethra, anus, or vagina).^[4] Because of spines protruding from the fish, it is almost impossible to remove except through surgery.^[8] Though there have been documented candiru attacks on humans,^[9] there is no evidence the fish can survive once inside a human. The danger for the person lies more in the infection and shock that results from having the organism lodged in sensitive tissues for an extended period of time than from physical damage done by the actual fish itself.

The fish locates its human targets when people urinate near the fish. A well-circulated myth is that the candiru is capable of swimming up the stream of urine in mid-air to a victim standing on shore or a boat, although this assertion is false. Nonetheless, there was a case in which the victim claimed that the fish jumped while he was urinating thigh deep.^[9] They are also probably not attracted to pure urine.^[4] It is believed that they are able to enter a human urethra only when it is expanded during urination.^[9]

A traditional cure involves the use of two plants, the jagua or jenipapo plant (Genipa americana) and the Buitach apple which are inserted (or their extract in the case of tight spaces) into the affected area. It is thought that these two plants together will kill and then dissolve the fish.^[10]

It has also been mentioned in the films Anaconda, The Rundown, Medicine Man, Sniper and the RiffTrax version of Predator.

Here is some info and terrifying photos of candiru removal: LINK

Text from wikipedia.

FAUX NEWS - WE MAKE IT UP

The court agreed with WTVT’s (Fox) argument “that the FCC’s policy against the intentional falsification of the news — which the FCC has called its “news distortion policy” — does not qualify as the required “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102.[...] Because the FCC’s news distortion policy is not a “law, rule, or regulation” under section 448.102, Akre has failed to state a claim under the whistle-blower’s statute.”^[1]

In 2001, Jane Akre and her husband won the Goldman Environmental Prize as a recognition for their report on RBGH. [1]

In 2004, Fox filed a US$1.7 million counter-suit against Akre and Wilson for trial fees and costs. Akre and Wilson both appear in a major portion of the 2004/5 critical documentary, The Corporation.

In 2007 Jane became the editor-in-chief of the national news desk at InjuryBoard.com

Text from wikipedia.

I’m an atheist, but I have to admit that I don’t totally agree with the idea put forward in the comic. This analogy may be stretching it but on the right track: It’s like saying to a hungry vegetarian that eating an animal that has already died of natural causes is a bad as killing an animal for food. I think stem cell research is justified and “moral”, but I can see why some religious people have their reservations about the idea.  And if despite their best efforts, the “morally wrong” stem cell research goes ahead and new treatments for diseases are found, then sure they should take advantage of the new technology. I honestly don’t see a strong hypocrisy here. Hopefully the experience would enlighten them a little, however.

On the other hand, I’ve long held the belief that only self-proclaimed organ donors and all children should be the recipients of organ donations. If there are any left, then let the non-donors benefit from the donations.

Interchangable Actors

I posted this almost a month ago with just a headline and a blank page.  I planned on writing some witty article about how similar these two actors are, but I’ve since found an article that demonstrates this quite well:

http://woodytondorf.wordpress.com/2009/03/02/cage-match-kevin-costner-vs-dennis-quaid/

William Calley

The My Lai Massacre was the mass murder of 347 to 504 unarmed civilian men, women and children in South Vietnam,conducted by U.S. Army forces on March 16, 1968. Some of the victims were sexually abused, beaten, tortured, or maimed, and some of the bodies were found mutilated. Of the 26 US soldiers initially charged with criminal offences for their actions at My Lai, only William Calley was convicted. He served three years of his life sentence.

The incident prompted widespread outrage around the world. The massacre also reduced U.S. support at home for the Vietnam War. Three U.S. servicemen who made an effort to halt the massacre and protect the wounded were sharply criticized by U.S. Congressmen, received hate mail, death threats and mutilated animals on their doorsteps. Only 30 years after the event were their efforts honored.

This one woman, I remember, she stood up and tried to make it - tried to run - with a small child in her arms. But she didn’t make it.

Charlie Company landed following a short artillery and helicopter gunship preparation. The Americans found no enemy fighters in the village on the morning of March 16. Many soldiers suspected there were NLF troops in the village, hiding underground in the homes of their elderly parents or their wives. After the first civilians were killed and wounded by the indiscriminate fire, the soldiers soon began attacking anything that moved, humans and animals alike, with firearms, grenades and bayonets. The scale of the massacre only spiraled as it progressed, the brutality increasing with each killing.

Soldiers went berserk, gunning down unarmed men, women, children and babies. Families which huddled together for safety in huts or bunkers were shown no mercy. Those who emerged with hands held high were murdered. … Elsewhere in the village, other atrocities were in progress. Women were gang raped; Vietnamese who had bowed to greet the Americans were beaten with fists and tortured, clubbed with rifle butts and stabbed with bayonets. Some victims were mutilated with the signature “C Company” carved into the chest. By late morning word had got back to higher authorities and a cease-fire was ordered. My Lai was in a state of carnage. Bodies were strewn through the village.

Dozens of people were herded into an irrigation ditch and other locations and killed with automatic weapons. A large group of about 70 to 80 villagers, rounded up by the 1st Platoon in the center of the village, were killed personally by Calley and by soldiers he had ordered to fire. Calley also shot two other large groups of civilians with a weapon taken from a soldier who had refused to do any further killing.

After the initial “sweeps” by the 1st and the 2nd Platoons, the 3rd Platoon was dispatched to deal with any “remaining resistance”. They immediately began killing every still-living human and animal they could find, including shooting the Vietnamese who emerged from their hiding places, and finishing off the wounded found moaning in the heaps of bodies. The 3rd Platoon also rounded up and killed a group of seven to twelve women and children.

During the next two days, both battalions were involved in additional burning and destruction of dwellings, and in the mistreatment of Vietnamese detainees. Most of the soldiers had not participated in the crimes, but neither protested nor complained to their superiors.

I would say that most people in our company didn’t consider the Vietnamese human.

Warrant Officer One Hugh Thompson, Jr., a helicopter pilot from an aero-scout team, witnessed a large number of dead and dying civilians as he began flying over the village — all of them infants, children, women and old men, with no signs of draft-age men or weapons anywhere. Thompson and his crew witnessed an unarmed passive woman kicked and shot at point-blank range by Captain Medina (Medina later claimed that he thought she had a grenade). The crew made several attempts to radio for help for the wounded. They landed their helicopter by a ditch, which they noted was full of bodies and in which there was movement. Thompson asked a sergeant he encountered there (David Mitchell of the 1st Platoon) if he could help get the people out of the ditch, and the sergeant replied that he would “help them out of their misery”. Thompson, shocked and confused, had then a conversation with Second Lieutenant Calley, Platoon Leader of 1st Platoon, who claimed to be “just following orders”. As the helicopter took off, they saw Mitchell firing into the ditch.

Thompson then saw a group of civilians (again consisting of children, women and old men) at a bunker being approached by ground personnel. Thompson landed and told his crew that if the U.S. soldiers shot at the Vietnamese while he was trying to get them out of the bunker that they were to open fire at these soldiers. Thompson later testified that he spoke with a lieutenant (identified as Stephen Brooks of the 2nd Platoon) and told him there were women and children in the bunker, and asked if the lieutenant would help get them out. According to Thompson, “he [the lieutenant] said the only way to get them out was with a hand grenade”. Thompson testified that he then told Brooks to “just hold your men right where they are, and I’ll get the kids out”. He found 12 to 16 people in the bunker, coaxed them out and led them to the helicopter, standing with them while they were flown out in two groups.

Returning to My Lai, Thompson and other air crew members noticed several large groups of bodies. Spotting some survivors in the ditch Thompson landed again and one of the crew members entered the ditch. The crew member returned with a bloodied but apparently unharmed child who was flown to safety. The child was thought to be a boy, but later investigation found that it was a 4-year-old girl. Thompson then reported what he had seen to his company commander, Major Watke, using terms such as “murder” and “needless and unnecessary killings”. Thompson’s reports were confirmed by other pilots and air crew.

In 1998, the three former U.S. servicemen who stopped their comrades from killing a number of villagers, significantly reducing casualties at My Lai, were awarded medals in Washington D.C. The veterans also made contact with the survivors of My Lai.

Owing to the chaotic circumstances and the Army’s decision not to undertake a definitive body count, the number of civilians killed at My Lai cannot be stated with certainty. Estimates vary from source to source, with 347 and 504 being the most commonly cited figures. The memorial at the site of the massacre lists 504 names, with ages ranging from one to 82 years. A later investigation by the U.S. Army arrived at a lower figure of 347 deaths, the official U.S. estimate.

Initial investigations of the My Lai operation were undertaken by the 11th Light Infantry Brigade’s commanding officer, Colonel Henderson, under orders from the Americal Division’s executive officer, Brigadier General George H. Young. Henderson interviewed several soldiers involved in the incident, then issued a written report in late April claiming that some 20 civilians were inadvertently killed during the operation. The army at this time was still describing the events at My Lai as a military victory that had resulted in the deaths of 128 enemy combatants.

Six months later, Tom Glen, a 21-year-old soldier of the 11th Light Infantry Brigade, wrote a letter to General Creighton Abrams, the new overall commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, accusing the Americal Division (and other entire units of the U.S. military) of routine and pervasive brutality against Vietnamese civilians. The letter was detailed and its contents echoed complaints received from other soldiers.

Colin Powell, then a 31-year-old Army Major, was charged with investigating the letter, which did not specifically reference My Lai (Glen had limited knowledge of the events there). In his report Powell wrote: “In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent.” Powell’s handling of the assignment was later characterized by some observers as “whitewashing” the atrocities of My Lai. In May 2004, Powell, then United States Secretary of State, told CNN’s Larry King, “I mean, I was in a unit that was responsible for My Lai. I got there after My Lai happened. So, in war, these sorts of horrible things happen every now and again, but they are still to be deplored.”

The carnage at My Lai might have gone unknown to history if not for another soldier, Ron Ridenhour, a former member of Charlie Company, who, independently of Glen, sent a letter detailing the events at My Lai to President Richard M. Nixon, the Pentagon, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and numerous members of Congress. The copies of this letter were sent in March 1969, a full year after the event. Most recipients of Ridenhour’s letter ignored it, with the notable exception of Congressman Morris Udall. Ridenhour learned about the events at My Lai secondhand, by talking to members of Charlie Company while he was still enlisted.

He fired at it [the baby] with a .45. He missed. We all laughed. He got up three or four feet closer and missed again. We laughed. Then he got up right on top and plugged him.

Eventually, Calley was charged with several counts of premeditated murder in September 1969, and 25 other officers and enlisted men were later charged with related crimes. It was another two months before the American public learned about the massacre and trials.

Burning a home.

Independent investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, after extensive conversations with Calley, broke the My Lai story on November 12, 1969; on November 20, Time, Life and Newsweek magazines all covered the story, and CBS televised an interview with Paul Meadlo. The Cleveland Plain Dealer published explicit photographs of dead villagers killed at My Lai.

In November 1969, General William R. Peers was appointed to conduct a thorough investigation into the My Lai incident and its subsequent cover-up. Peers’ final report, published in March 1970, was highly critical of top officers for participation in a cover-up and the Charlie Company officers for their actions at My Lai 4. According to Peers’s findings:

[The 1st Battalion] members had killed at least 175–200 Vietnamese men, women, and children. The evidence indicates that only 3 or 4 were confirmed as Viet Cong although there were undoubtedly several unarmed VC (men, women, and children) among them and many more active supporters and sympathizers. One man from the company was reported as wounded from the accidental discharge of his weapon.

However, critics of the Peers Commission pointed out that it sought to place the real blame on four officers who were already dead, foremost among them being the CO of TF Barker, LTC Frank Barker, who was killed in a mid air collision on June 13, 1968.

On November 17, 1970, the United States Army charged 14 officers, including Major General Samuel W. Koster, the Americal Division’s commanding officer, with suppressing information related to the incident. Most of those charges were later dropped. Brigade commander Henderson was the only officer who stood trial on charges relating to the cover-up; he was acquitted on December 17, 1971.

After a four-month-long trial, in which he claimed that he was following orders from his commanding officer, Captain Medina, William Calley was convicted, on March 29, 1971, of premeditated murder for ordering the shootings. He was initially sentenced to life in prison. Two days later, however, President Nixon made the controversial decision to have Calley released from prison, pending appeal of his sentence. Calley’s sentence was later adjusted, so that he would eventually serve four and one-half months in a military prison at Fort Benning.

Victims of war

In a separate trial, Captain Medina denied giving the orders that led to the massacre, and was acquitted of all charges, effectively negating the prosecution’s theory of “command responsibility”, now referred to as the “Medina standard”. Several months after his acquittal, however, Medina admitted that he had suppressed evidence and had lied to Colonel Henderson about the number of civilian deaths.

Most of the enlisted men who were involved in the events at My Lai had already left military service, and were thus legally exempt from prosecution. In the end, of the 26 men initially charged, Calley’s was the only conviction.

Some have argued that the outcome of the My Lai courts-martial was a reversal of the laws of war that were set forth in the Nuremberg and Tokyo War Crimes Tribunals. Those tribunals set a historic precedent, establishing the principle that no one may be excused from responsibility for war crimes because they were “following orders”. Secretary of the Army Howard Callaway was quoted in the New York Times as stating that Calley’s sentence was reduced because Calley honestly believed that what he did was a part of his orders — a rationale that stands in direct contradiction of the standards set at Nuremberg and Tokyo, where German and Japanese soldiers were executed for similar acts.

The explosive news of the massacre fueled the outrage of the antiwar movement, which demanded the withdrawal of American troops from Vietnam. It also led more potential draftees to file for conscientious objector status. Those who had always argued against the war felt vindicated; those on the fringes of the movement became more vocal.

The more pivotal shift, however, was in the attitude of the general public toward the war. People who previously had not been interested in the peace/war debates began to analyze the issue more closely. The horrific stories of other soldiers began to be taken more seriously, and other abuses came to light.

Some military observers concluded that My Lai showed the need for more and better volunteers to provide stronger leadership for the troops. As the Vietnam conflict dragged on, the number of well trained and experienced career soldiers on the front lines dropped sharply as casualties and combat rotation took their toll. These observers claimed the absence of the many bright young men who avoided military service through college attendance or homeland service caused the talent pool for new officers to become very shallow. They pointed to Calley, a young, unemployed college dropout, as an example of the raw and inexperienced recruits being rushed through officer training. Others pointed out problems with the military’s insistence on unconditional obedience to orders while at the same time limiting the doctrine of “command responsibility” to the lowest ranks. Others saw My Lai and related war crimes as a direct result of the military’s attrition strategy, with its emphasis on “body counts” and “kill ratios”. The fact that the massacre was successfully covered up for 18 months was seen as a prime example of the Pentagon’s “Culture of Concealment” and of the lack of integrity that permeated the Defense establishment. And the fact that Calley was the only officer convicted led many to see him as a scapegoat.

Text edited from wikipedia.

Watching the ripples.

“I had a vision this morning” the boy said to his father, “while throwing stones into a pond and watching the ripples. I saw another little boy on the furthest end of the Universe, on a planet so far away that if you’d shone a light in its direction on the second the Big Bang happened, the light still wouldn’t have reached it by now. And he was throwing stones into a pond just like me, and the circles were exactly the same.”

“They’re the same everywhere,” his father replied.

“So how do they know to be? Where did they learn their shape from?”

“Do you know what Pi is?”

“Yeah, we learned it in school last month.”

“Well Pi doesn’t have to be told what it is, just like 4 doesn’t need to be told it’s the sum of 2 + 2. And as long as Pi is what it is, every circle is the same everywhere.”

“But where do Pi and 4 come from?”

“They don’t come from anywhere, we just discover them whenever something happens. Numbers were always there, even if we never bothered to look for them, even if nobody ever drew a circle, or nobody ever threw a stone into a pond.”

Continue Reading at disenchanted.com
]]> http://mightyinteresting.com/2009/02/10/i-had-a-vision-this-morning/feed/ http://mightyinteresting.com/2009/02/10/7-saudi-arabian-wtfs/ http://mightyinteresting.com/2009/02/10/7-saudi-arabian-wtfs/#comments Wed, 11 Feb 2009 03:30:25 +0000 tdw http://mightyinteresting.com/?p=120

King Abdullah can stop the madness but probably wont.

1. Saudi judge sentences pregnant gang-rape victim to 100 lashes for committing adultery.
2. Saudi Arabia is one of a number of countries where courts continue to impose corporal punishment, including amputations of hands and feet for robbery, and lashings for lesser crimes such as “sexual deviance” and drunkenness. The number of lashes is not clearly prescribed by law and is varied according to the discretion of judges, and ranges from dozens of lashes to several thousand, usually applied over a period of weeks or months.
3. In 1997, Human Rights Watch examined the case of Abd al-Karim Mara’i al-Naqshabandi, who was executed after being convicted of practicing witchcraft against his employer. The organization concluded that the Saudi legal system “fails to provide minimum due process guarantees and offers myriad opportunities for well-connected individuals to manipulate the system to their advantage.
4. The Commission for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice and the Public Prosecution in Makkah are investigating the case of an Indonesian AIDS victim who was raped by 46 men, including one police officer, around a month ago.
5. Saudi Arabia is one of the few countries in the 2008 Olympics without a female delegation. Women’s sports are, in principle, banned; although some teams do exist.
6. In 1962, Saudi Arabia outlawed slavery, freeing about 10,000 slaves out of an estimated 15,000-30,000.
7. Freedom of speech and the press are restricted to forbid criticism of the government or endorsement of “un-Islamic” values. Trade unions and political organizations are banned. Public demonstrations are forbidden. The Saudi Government is an active censor of Internet reception within its borders.

UPDATES:

1. Jordanian beats daughter to death for wearing makeup in ‘honour’ killing