Miscellaneous desk
< January 21	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 23 >

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.

January 22

further info re: weasels

I have read the articles on weasels, but have need of further info. My family has lost 2 cats in the past 2 wks. They were both taken at night and found in the lake the next morning, dead. Each time their body was chewed open and insides gone. Their sleeping place was on a second floor deck with the lattice work gate to the deck locked and a warmed "cat house" to protect them from cold and bad weather. The male, taken first, was about 15 yrs old and weighed about 10-12 lbs. The female was 14 yrs old and a smaller cat, about 6lbs. My father says he has seen some weasels in the vicinity at times, but not up close to the house. Considering the cats size and weight and years of survival, do you think a weasel could have got up on the deck, carried them off and left them in the lake? It has been very cold here in Alabama for the past few weeks and the cats certainly would not venture down to the water. They are always in their house when it is cold and/or windy. Please answer and let me know if a weasel is capable of this. Thank you4.153.89.93 (talk) 00:08, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It's hard to imagine an animal as small as a weasel overcoming a house cat, even an elderly one. I would be inclined to suspect a bobcat or a raccoon. Marco polo (talk) 00:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'd have thought a wild weasel would come off tops against a house-cat, especially elderly cats as described. Weasels can be vicious little so-and-sos. I'm very sorry for your loss, cats are very special. DuncanHill (talk) 00:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Given the location you found them (in or near a lake), and your location (Alabama), I suspect it was a raccoon. Raccoons can hold their own against nearly any breed of dog, and would have no trouble overcoming a house cat. They're also quite comfortable in and around water, so dragging the carcass down to the shore to feed is reasonable. I'm sorry for your loss. I love cats (I've got 4). In the future, please consider keeping your pets indoors. The average lifespan of an outdoor cat is only 2~3 years due to accidents & predators. You were very lucky to have both of yours survive longer than a decade! 218.25.32.210 (talk) 01:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please provide a reference for that 2-3 years. I think it is far higher than that... --Tango (talk) 01:33, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The reference was posted a few months ago. Look it up in the archives. Outdoor cats live a small fraction of the years of indoor cats. Edison (talk) 05:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was a discussion in which you participated. See Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2009 August 7#New Kitten in House with Cats. Indoor cats live 14-20 years, while outdoor cats lie 3-5 years, per the references then cited. (Mileage may vary).Edison (talk) 05:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I kind of wish your citations had citations. Mileage must vary substantially depending on whether you live in a country with raccoons and bobcats, and whether "outdoor cat" means "medically neglected" cat or not, as you first reference seems to think it does. 81.131.59.147 (talk) 10:26, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not post what I think on the Reference Desk, I post what I know. The U.S. Humane Society's website has a PDF called Cat Care Basics. On page 12 you will find the following text - Keeping Your Cat Safe Don't be tempted by the idea of a wandering, free-spirited cat to let your cat roam freely outdoors. The HSUS estimates that the average life span of a cat who lives his or her life outdoors is less than three years. Even indoor-outdoor cats — those who roam outdoors occasionally but spend much of their time inside — face far shorter life spans on average than their safely confined counterparts. If you disagree with this assessment, you can take it up with them. 218.25.32.210 (talk) 02:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My neighbors (I'm speaking the Alpine region of Slovenia) have plenty of completely free roaming cats, and even my family had some in the past, and saying they most likely wont live past 3 years seems like a ridiculously gross exaggeration considering my real-life observations - the second most common cause of death for cats in my neighborhood (second to death of old age) is getting hit by cars. Other than that, maybe the occasional fox or dog may kill one, but that's rare. Heck, even getting hit by a car is rare. I wonder if the US has a larger number of natural cat predators? TomorrowTime (talk) 09:53, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Seconded, from the UK. Keeping a cat permanently indoors would be regarded here as strange, eccentric, possibly even cruel. Our cats aren't all dying young. 93.97.184.230 (talk) 21:50, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This type of thing probably varies wildly depending on the neighborhood. If a gazillion cats get run over in (for example) Manhattan, but a few cats survive to old age out in the country, you could expect the national average to be quite low even if all the cats in your immediate rural neighborhood have nice long lives. APL (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

High levels of kitten mortality would also dramatically lower life expectancies without shortening the lives of cats known to you personally. APL (talk) 17:51, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What makes the weasel unlikely is that the cats were dragged from a tall structure across a yard to a lake. A cat weighs several times as much as a weasel. I can't see how the weasel could get the cat to the lake. On the other hand, raccoons are known to kill cats, drag them to a favored feeding spot, and then eat them: [1]. Marco polo (talk) 01:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The wolverine is a type of weasel. Are there any wolverines in the south? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A wolverine is to a weasel what a tiger is to a housecat, and the only wolverine within 1,000 miles of Alabama would be in a zoo. Googlemeister (talk) 14:45, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is in response to TomorrowTime: there's a lot more predatory wildlife in and around North American cities then in Europe. I live in a well-settled suburban area, and have heard of raccoons, foxes, coyotes, black bears, and badgers roaming from time to time in the neighborhood. Bobcats, cougars and other beasts hazardous to housepets are present elsewhere near residential areas in North America. The fact the cats survived many years without problems is likely a sign that the predator moved to the Alabama neighborhood recently. Unusual weather patterns may indeed have led it to stray away from its usual habitat. --Xuxl (talk) 15:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect cars, not predators, are the leading cause of death of outdoor cats in the US. Anecdotally, I don't know anyone who has had a cat get killed by a predator, though I know many, many who have had cats hit by cars. --Mr.98 (talk) 16:09, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recall seeing more dead dogs and cats along 2 lane highways in the country than along city streets. A 60 mile per hour car in the country may be more deadly than a 30 mile per hour car in the city. An urban environment might be less deadly to a cat than a rural environment. Edison (talk) 17:35, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In New England, the Fisher, known locally as a "Fishercat", was known to take out cats and small dogs; not often, but it is documented. A fisher is a mustelid just like a weasel is, and though fishers do not range as far south as Alabama, there are lots of other predators that do. I can't see a raccoon doing it, I'm sure raccoons can hunt, but any raccoon in an environment where it comes into regular contact with people will surely find it easier to scavange from trash rather than actively hunt cats. Raccoons are wily and intelligent and I can't see one prefering to take out your cat when your trash can is likely just sitting there waiting to be raided. Path of least resistance, and all. If we confine ourselves to mustelids, then I would think that your cats are likely falling victim to the American Badger. It is more common out west, but our article says that they range from Mexico to Canada, and Alabama certainly qualifies as vaguely between Mexico and Canada. If we expand to other predators, then something like a Cougar (mountain lion, puma, panther, whatever) could be possible. While most were driven out of the Eastern U.S. long ago, there have been sightings around places like Chicago and New Hampshire and places like that. Would not be out of the realm of possibility. Coyotes are much more likely, given their near endemic spread across the whole of North America. Bobcats are a possibility too. But the list could go on and on.--Jayron32 05:42, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know that coyotes and mountain lions have been moving east in recent years, but the Alabama part makes me wonder if wild boars/feral pigs would be a more likely culprit. Not sure they would break into a second-story fenced deck like that, though. One thing the OP might try is to look for tracks near where the bodies were found; especially as they were near water - there's probably mud nearby. Larger animals would leave tracks. AlexiusHoratius 06:30, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UK road safety advert

Looking for one of the UK's road safety ads that I remember from when I was a kid. It was, I think, to do with looking before crossing (rather than speeding) - I remember it involved someone stepping into the road, with the tarmac deforming and morphing into a car that then hit them. Anyone know its name or a YouTube link? Thanks! 131.111.248.99 (talk) 01:25, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It'll likely be helpful if you give a rough time frame of when you saw this ad rather then 'when I was a kid' (since we don't know your age). From the description, I doubt it was in the 1950s for example (too fancy effects for the time for a road safety ad) but that's just a guess. And since there was ads on UK TV at the time (whether road safety ads, I don't know), it seems possible based on the only clues you've provided that the time frame could be in the 1950s until say 2005 which is very wide Nil Einne (talk) 10:59, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And there were cinema advertisements before that. Warofdreams talk 11:22, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See this article on the Green Cross Code which gives a history of the subject. In the mid-1960s we were taught the "Kerb Drill" which confused me as I was convinced a kerb drill was a tool used by road menders (well, I was only 6). Alansplodge (talk) 11:15, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you get no joy here, you could try asking over at TV Cream http://www.tvcream.co.uk/?page_id=81/longshots/ --Frumpo (talk) 14:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh, sorry! I think this would have been mid 90s (maybe 93-97 kind of time). 131.111.248.99 (talk) 15:16, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Public Information Films are here http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/FILMS/ --Frumpo (talk) 17:06, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Carrageenan

In reading up on this product, I find that it is seaweed. Seaweed contains Iodine, which many people are allergic to. There is no warning label on products that contain Carrageenan ie: "this product contains peanuts or milk or soy". This is very serious and should be addressed. Is there any way to add this information to this product, even in Wikipedia and have companies add this warning to their products? thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leebrotherstx (talk • contribs) 04:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An iodine allergy sounds unusual to me. It's a necessary nutrient, and I can't find anything about allergies in Iodine in biology. Note that iodine is added to most table salt to protect against goiter, and it's an important flavor component of the best Scotch whiskey. PhGustaf (talk) 05:30, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Google [iodine allergy] and you'll see plenty of references to it, a number of which claim that there is no actual allergy to iodine. Not being trained in this area, I couldn't say who's right. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, that was the first (and so far, only) edit by the named user. I wonder what's up with that. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:50, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Who cares? How does this affect us at all? Comet Tuttle (talk) 18:51, 22 January 2010 (UTC) [reply]

It's a puzzlement. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:31, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

So the assumption is that everyone should have edited elsewhere before they ask a question, Nah, don't buy that. Richard Avery (talk) 08:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When a supposed newbie's one and only edit is to raise a possibly controversial question, then it looks fishy. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:13, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When he's made his 10,000th edit, this will still be his very first edit but it will no longer be his one and only edit. Will it still look fishy then? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 20:02, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hard telling. I'm still waiting (though not at all anxiously) for his second edit. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 20:06, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Iodine allergies" usually refer to something quite different to a dietary allergy. Some people react to radiology contrast dyes; others can have skin reactions to topical iodine solutions such as Povidone-iodine. This is not always due to the iodine itself. Gwinva (talk) 07:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that iodine is an essential trace nutrient, and an absence of iodine in the diet – iodine deficiency – causes goiter and cretinism. Iodine compounds are frequently added to food supplies, especially salt. (Iodised salt is consumed in roughly two-thirds of all households worldwide.) As Gwinva notes, the reactive elemental iodine present in topical iodine antiseptics is quite different from the compounded iodine in foods and supplements. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 15:07, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

People confuse fish allergy with iodine allergy (which is uncommon). Here is what iodine points to. Hey bugs: AGF. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:28, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Song in commercial

There's a TV commercial that's been playing recently (I couldn't tell you what the product is). I recently realized I wanted to find that out so I could Google the commercial, mainly for the song that's playing.

The song consists of nonsense syllables with a catchy tune. It sounds a little like Vertigogo, by Combustible Edison, but I don't think it is.

The commercial is animated/CGI, and shows a stylized, blocky frisbee being thrown to a stylized, blocky dog. I think the background is purple.

Does this ring a bell with anyone? --Trovatore (talk) 11:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Any particular country? (not that I can help, probably). --ColinFine (talk) 18:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

US. Would probably have been on one of the following channels: SyFy, the CW, Fox, or the Comedy Channel. --Trovatore (talk) 20:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, don't know the comercial itself, but some ideas for songs with nonsense lyrics may be

Mah Nà Mah Nà, which is quite famous in the U.S. for its use in The Muppet Show, and has shown up in advertising fairly recently.
Shoo-Be-Doo-Be-Doo-Da-Day by Stevie Wonder
Strangers in the Night, especially Frank Sinatra's scat at the end of the song.
De Do Do Do, De Da Da Da by The Police.
Do Wah Diddy Diddy by Manfred Mann
Who Put the Bomp (In the Bomp, Bomp, Bomp) by Barry Mann
Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah

Just some places to start looking, but my money would be on "Mah Na Mah Na". --Jayron32 05:27, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It was definitely not Mah Na Mah Na. Thinking about it I think it was probably Vertigogo after all; maybe a slightly different arrangement than the one I have. But I just didn't quite get that recognition feeling when I went back and played Vertigogo so I'm still not sure.

Has anyone else recently heard Vertigogo on American TV commercials? --

Are you referring to the Honda Crosstour commercials? Specifically the "Boxes" ad [2]? From what I can tell, the song is called Pata Pata. (Google autocompletes "music" and "song" for "Honda Crosstour ad", so it seems to be a popular question.) By the way, "Pata Pata" is not nonsense syllables, but rather lyrics in the Xhosa language. -- 174.21.213.12 (talk) 23:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's it!! Thank you very much. --Trovatore (talk) 23:26, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How is the membership of the DEC chosen?

Resolved

And also, why isn't World Jewish Relief in it? Christian Aid is, Islamic Relief is. I'm not suggesting an anti-Semitic conspiracy, but it seems odd.

Thanks, 130.88.171.213 (talk) 18:27, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please make it clear what the "DEC" is. In the US, it's a defunct computer manufacturer, and a quick Google search doesn't dig up anything that sees relevant. PhGustaf (talk) 18:37, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DEC is the Disasters Emergency Committee, and includes 13 major British relief charities. I do not know why World Jewish Relief is not a member, maybe it would be worth the OP asking them? DuncanHill (talk) 18:40, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I found the same thing and made the same suggestion before the edit conflict. PhGustaf (talk) 18:44, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The simple non-conspiracy explanation seems to be that World Jewish Relief is not quite large enough for DEC membership. One of the DEC membership criteria is "expenditure on emergency work overseas of £10 million a year averaged over three years". World Jewish Relief Fund annual report and accounts 2008/2009 says their charitable expenditure was £8.4m in 2008 and £6.6m in 2009.

The answer to the original question (How is the membership of the DEC chosen?) is that membership is reviewed every 3 years and any organisation that thinks it meets the membership criteria can apply for membership. Next membership review is in 2011.Gandalf61 (talk) 20:17, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers everyone, that pretty much clears it all up. 130.88.171.213 (talk) 08:59, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My garage door opener

I think the motor is burned out, but I'm not sure. When I activate it the carriage travels a few inches with some clicks and hums, then stops and reverses itself. This is with no load on it (I've disengaged the door itself). Any tricks I can try to get it working again before I go out to buy a new unit? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Agastordoff (talk • contribs) 20:43, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When this has happened to me, it was because the light sensor at the bottom of the door was misaligned; the misalignment was misinterpreted as being a little kid wedged under the door's path, so the door reversed itself. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:34, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you can see a large capacitor with the motor, look to see if it is swollen and if it is replace it. I've done that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.220.46.124 (talk) 21:38, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "move, click, reverse" pattern indicates that one of the safety mechanisms is triggering, because it thinks the door has run into an obstacle. Check the opener's track for obstructions, check any light sensors for dust, and if you're comfortable working with machinery, unplug the motor unit, open it, and check for obstructions or damage to the gears. --Carnildo (talk) 00:24, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a light that turns on when it opens? Does the light blink when the lift doesn't work right? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 19:24, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hah! We just recently fixed the same problem on our garage door. We tried everything - adjusting the sensors, re-greasing the chain, re-greasing the tracks, cleaning out everything. What eventually fixed it, against all sense, was resetting the remote. Most remotes have a large button to open and close the door, and then one or more smaller buttons to reprogram the link between remote and motor. Resetting that link is what did it for us. Sounds completely bullshit, I know, but we'd been having trouble for months and this is what fixed it. Worth a try - and cheaper than hiring an outside handyman by a long shot. Matt Deres (talk) 15:36, 25 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

commercial airline pilots

What is the ages of commercial airline pilots flying for major US air carriers?

Number below 25, 25-35, 35-45, 45-55, older? Googlemeister (talk) 20:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

14 CFR 121.383 mandates that airline pilots may not be age 65 older. 14 CFR 61.123 mandates that a commercial pilot must be at least 18 years of age. So, airline pilots flying for major US air carriers are between ages 18 and 65. anonymous6494 21:18, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The FAA has a page of aviation data statistics right here, for USA data. I didn't find exactly what you are looking for, but one of the Excel sheets says the average age of a commercial pilot in 2003 was 46.5, and the average "airline transport" category was 47.0. A different Excel sheet on that page has actual numbers of pilot certificate holders, sorted by age category just like you asked; but it's all pilots, not just commercial ones. Comet Tuttle (talk) 21:42, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note that a commercial rating and an airline rating are two separate things (with airline being much more intensive with the training). You must be 23 to be eligible to fly commercially for an airline, but 18 to charge somebody money to fly them to a destination 14 CFR 61.153a. Falconus^{p t c} 17:14, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a distinction between cargo and passenger too? --Tango (talk) 20:51, 23 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure. I'm training to be a private pilot, which essentially means that I will not be allowed to charge passengers more than an equal share of the cost of the flight (if it costs $200 to fly three passengers somewhere, I cannot legally charge the three more than $50 each). I don't know where the exact regulations are specified for what qualifies as airline transport operations and what qualifies as commercial (and where cargo falls into the midst of it all). If I had to make an educated guess, I'd say that if you were flying cargo for an airline (such as FedEx, perhaps), you would need an airline transport rating, but if you wanted to fly cargo in your own plane for a profit, all you'd need is a commercial rating. The place that I am fuzzy about is where exactly lies the difference between a company that hires pilots to fly airplanes and an airline. Falconus^{p t c} 05:20, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Airlines fly scheduled routes and are subject to more regulation than "a company that hires pilots to fly airplanes". The latter falls under the area of general aviation. FiggyBee (talk) 07:38, 26 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]