Miscellaneous desk
< December 28	<< Nov \| December \| Jan >>	Current desk >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Miscellaneous Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

December 29

Biggest animal that ever lived

You say Balaenoptera Musculus is the biggest animal that ever lived,what about Argentinosaurus? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.12.221.208 (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The sauropods are long, but mostly skinny neck and tail. See this. μηδείς (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And if you are interested in why, a land animal as large as a blue whale just couldn't support it's own weight at 1 g. Bones can only take so much weight. In water, the whale's weight is supported by the water. StuRat (talk) 08:07, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Khichuri part of Pakistani and Indian cuisine?

When did Khichuri or Khichdi become a part of Pakistani and Indian cuisine? I thought it was a Bengali dish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.54.64.20 (talk) 02:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not so long ago, part of Bengal became East Pakistan which became Bangladesh. The rest of it became subsumed into India. --TammyMoet (talk) 14:45, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why are human rights more practiced in wealthy western countries than underdeveloped ones?

Venustar84 (talk) 02:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I can think of several reasons:

1) Those rights are often obtained by protests, such as strikes and marches. In a poor nation, where people will starve if they leave their jobs to do such things, you don't get as many mass actions.

2) Poverty also frequently means a lack of education and knowledge of the rest of the world, so they may not realize it's better in other places and can be better there.

3) The oppressive government will find it easier to hire henchmen to keep the people oppressed, if the people are poor and willing to work for peanuts (perhaps literally).

4) In poor nations you often get civil wars, with people fighting over the meager resources the nation has, and civil wars can bring human rights violations on both sides.

5) Even if a nation has sound laws, it often takes expensive lawyers to get them to follow those laws. So, poor people are sometimes denied equal protection under the law. (When free lawyers are provided to the poor, they may be incompetent or unmotivated.) StuRat (talk) 08:13, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See also Maslow's hierarchy of needs (including the critique thereof). --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 11:44, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

History is also a significant factor. The Enlightenment happened in what we now call the "western world". The process of "exporting" the concepts of human rights from the western world to other places is not yet complete. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:31, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are implying a reversal of cause and effect. It's those nations that respect individual life, liberty and happiness that achieve the common good. μηδείς (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, China, some OPEC countries on the Arabic peninsula and the early Industrial Revolution are counter-examples to the preceding μηδεί-an hypothesis. All of these countries have advanced the common good with little respect for the individual. In my above reference to Maslow I have pointed to the critique (ethnocentricity, failure to differentiate between collectivist and individualistic societies) of his theory. It may be simplistic but futile to measure all cultures by the same standards. --Cookatoo.ergo.ZooM (talk) 20:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

China has only become wealthy in modern times with the rule of law and economic liberalization. Sixty million murdered under Mao and It's glorious to get rich under Deng Xiaoping and his successors. The size of its market helps. Tiny countries like England and Holland became inordinately wealthy for their size with the advent of classical liberalism following thinkers like Locke and Spinoza. The OPEC countries are dictatorships with a lot of oil wealth they stole from the West and still rely upon the West to refine, ship, and pay for. Compare North and South Korea, East and West Germany. Look at the fact that living standards were higher before Castro than after, before the Ayatollah than now. Freedom brings wealth. μηδείς (talk) 21:01, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wealth brings more freedom to more people... eventually. Although it's no picnic being an average citizen in China now, it's relatively better than during Mao's reign of terror. But they've got a long way to go before they achieve a fair balance of power. Eventually the workers might decide that they're tired of being pawns, and try to form unions. And as with the early days of unions in America, it could get very violent and bloody. The 1 percent do not share power willingly. There was a reasonable balance in America during the 20th century until cheap developing-nations' labor became available, making the American unions (and hence the American middle class) vulnerable. China is currently in the "robber baron" stage, and American business is trying to retrogress to that stage. It's always a struggle to find a fair balance. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:54, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

China seems to be becoming a kleptocracy, where the same people make the laws who own the businesses. This inevitably leads to laws that favor businesses against workers, to an extreme degree. Ironically, this may ultimately result in a communist revolution against the "Communist Party". StuRat (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That would be funny. (From a distance, anyway.) But as a practical matter, how could anyone or any group neutralize or purge the current collection of leaders? And who would finance it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:32, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Following on from what Medeis said. The wealth of a 'nation' or in other words, its people (as opposed to its is mineral resources etc.) is usually scored as Per capita income. For example: poor Afghanistan is fabulously wealthy on the book value (vis population) of its unexploited minerals. Yet, no one would regard the 'nation' as wealthy. When only a small minority hold most of its nation's wealth, the majority do not have the means to take the risk to become entrepreneurial and so create business and industry to increase their county's wealth. Another good, modern day example is the US. Fabulously rich but the wealth is is now in the hands of so few people that the quality of life and living standard for the majority of its population is going down, down, down. When I last looked at the World Health Organization's (WHO) I was shocked at the lowering of their average life expectancy. Historically this is not unexpected. There appears to be a 400 year cycle where economics and might, vacillates between the far east and the west. China is now in the ascendancy. Its people are slowly getting more freedoms. There is nothing the western politicians sitting in Congress can do about it, because just like 'old' China, they (the US ruling classes) have to, increase their hold over 'their' population evermore, to support their own elevated living standards and prestige. Remember the old adage: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it". So in short, when an old order collapses, when it did in (say Britain) during the the Black Death). The common people's new freedom revitalized the economy -the nation prospered . England's King Henry VIII further reduced the strangle hold of the ecclesiastical grip on common commerce – the nation prospered still more. Cromwell loosened the grip of the the Monarchy -and the 'nation' prospered even further more and so on and so on.--Aspro (talk) 20:56, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plug Adaptor from UK plug to Vietnam

What type of plug adaptor would I need for Vietnam? Is it the standard two-pin (round) European type? Or would I need the two-pin (flat version) used in Spain and Japan? Or both, as I did in Korea? KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 05:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Without more info about where you'll be, it's hard to say. See Mains electricity by country. Dismas|^(talk) 06:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hanoi is my destination. Basically I should take both A and C versions, it seems. Thanks. KägeTorä - (影虎) (TALK) 06:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be a mixture of flat pin US style (A) and round pin Euro style (C) plugs. Another problem might be the presence of 110 V supplies in some places - you might need a transformer. At least it is all 50 Hz. Astronaut (talk) 12:01, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can Full-Grain Leather not have pores?

I recently received a Saddleback Leather item, a company known for producing items with full-grain leather. However, an inspection with the naked eye and under a loupe reveals a lack of hair pores on the leather surface. However, the leather does feel very high-end. Is it possible to have high-quality full-grain leather that does not have hair pores? Many online guides suggest that full-grain leather MUST have visible hair pores. Acceptable (talk) 08:19, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry you haven't had a response up to now – it looks as though none of the regular volunteers have much knowledge of leather.

I'm firmly in that same lack-of-leathery-knowledge camp, but after checking up the terminology, I can suggest the following possible explanations:

the item has the outer, pored/follicled layer on its inside where you haven't been able to examine it (unlikely, but you didn't explain the nature of the item);
the leather used happens to come from a naked and poreless area of whatever animal contributed it – similar to your own palms or soles;
the item is not in fact made from full-grain leather – you said that it comes from a company "known for producing items with full-grain leather" but not that it was actually advertised as such.

If it wasn't so advertised, it probably isn't, because why would the company fail to mention a positive selling point? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.204.16.14 (talk) 17:15, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eggnog

In the UK, Eggnog is neither a popular Christmas drink nor is it readily available in shops. According to our article it is a UK invention that spread to the colonies and is now pretty ubiquitous in North America. Is eggnog's decline in the UK related to the dairy rationing of World War II? 13:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.145.143.8 (talk)

Well, I can remember back to the early 1960s, and I can never remember any mention of eggnog in a UK context, though Warnink's Advocaat used to be advertised a lot on tv - I was never tempted to try it. -- Arwel Parry (talk) 14:21, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I couldn't see anything specific, but it seems to have fallen out of favour over here long before that. The The Oxford Encyclopedia of Food and Drink in America (p. 671) has it as "a tradition of Christmas and New Year's celebrations throughout the United States" although it "reflect[s] the English heritage in America". Most of the references on Google to eggnog, egg-nog or egg nog in England seem to refer back to the 1800s. Tastes in drinks change regularly, in the 19th century Englishmen in pubs mainly drank porter. I recently found a 1960s London newspaper advertisement for Christmas drinks; heading the list were numerous brands of sherry, Babycham and that noxious canned beer called Double Diamond and its equally unpleasant rival, Long Life ("specially brewed for the can"). Also in the list was Bol's Advocaat, which our article notes "is similar to eggnog". Alansplodge (talk) 14:27, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to tell how any of those things could be more noxious than eggnog itself. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Even if it were "available" in Britain, you'd be advised to avoid the disgusting gum and preservative-ridden commercial concoctions, and just whip an egg in a glass of chilled milk and add a little rum or creme de menthe for sweetness. I assume rum, creme de methe, milk and eggs are available across the pond. μηδείς (talk) 16:48, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Correct assumption. We even have electricity. Pointless. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:06, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Highest recorded temperature

The weather channel shows april 2006 Coos Bay Oregon high as 180 degrees?? Is this possible and true youwiln — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.234.202.153 (talk) 17:56, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it is not true. That's an incredibly high temperature, far higher than the record listed here: Highest temperatures ever recorded. I suspect the digits were transposed, and it should be 108, not 180. Is it possible? Probably not under natural circumstances, but I'll leave that to more expert opinion. Mingmingla (talk) 19:04, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, they made a mistake of some kind...there are disputes about the record temperatures - but they only differ by a few degrees - it would be truly unbelievable to have a temperature break the current record by over 40 degrees F. SteveBaker (talk) 19:08, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The unofficial heat burst record is 189 F (87 C) in Abadan, Iran in June 1967, so 180 F isn't _impossible_ - I don't know how long a heat burst has to be before it becomes a "proper" temperature record. That being said, Coos Bay, Oregon does not appear on the heat burst chart, and it seems like an unlikely location for such a high temperature, even transiently. Tevildo (talk) 23:43, 29 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With heat like that, metal and stone surfaces wouldn't only cook eggs, but burn up the discarded shells, apparently a problem for Death Valley this year, around the centennial of another "hottest day on Earth" (134 Fahrenheit).

Coos Bay doesn't even hold the record among typos. I can't recall the exact city, date or temperature, but according to an edition of Jay Leno's Headlines, a Midwest US town went well into the 900s around 1995. (I'll try to find that, unreliable as it is). InedibleHulk (talk) 00:43, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can't find the clip, but by remembering another headline from the episode (with SleepTite mattresses "rats get in, but they don't get out"), I've found it was probably from June 1996. InedibleHulk (talk) 00:58, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]