Miscellaneous desk
< March 4	<< Feb \| March \| Apr >>	March 6 >

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.

March 5[edit]

Iran would attack to Israel![edit]

it seems that iran goverment is gonna be ready to attack and disturb the country named israel soon on 2012 what do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.keyvan (talk • contribs) 07:22, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think "the reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events." Clarityfiend (talk) 07:45, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They already can, and do, attack Israel via their proxies in the Gaza Strip (Hamas) and Lebanon (Hezbollah). They also can reach Israel with missiles. If you're talking about finishing their nuclear weapon and dropping it on Israel, that would be rather stupid, as Israel would then do the same to them. StuRat (talk) 07:49, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And Israel attacks Iran via its local assassins as well. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:17, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but even putting aside Israel targeting Iran's nuclear scientists versus Iran's proxies targeting Israeli civilians, if you compare the number of Israelis killed by Hamas and Hezbollah with the number of Iranians killed by Israel, it's quite lopsided, showing a great deal of restraint on the part of Israel, until now. StuRat (talk) 21:00, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Err, I'm not sure "restraint" is what I'd call Israeli response. Take a look at the casualty lists in the Gaza War. In the last ten years, far more Palestinians have died than Israelis in the West Bank conflicts. Far more Hezbollah died in Hezbollah vs. Israeli conflicts than Israelis (see the lists at 2006 Lebanon War). And a lot of that front has been quiet for a few years now. But it's not about some kind of crude body count tit-for-tat. I think that sneaking in and assassinating civilian scientists is a pretty provocative act, personally. What do you think the result would be if the Iran was assassinating American physicists at Los Alamos? Even the Soviet Union was not so bold as that. --Mr.98 (talk) 01:36, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's restraint towards Iran, not towards Hamas. Iran has already launched multiple attacks against Israel in response to the nuclear scientist attacks, but they had less success, due to apparent incompetence: Iran–Israel_relations#Military_confrontations_and_psyops. And what do you think would have been the result if the Soviet Union had supported terrorists in Mexico who launched missiles and suicide bombers at the US ? StuRat (talk) 07:40, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The US would have gone after the proxies involved, not taken out hits on Soviet civilian scientists. Obviously. --Mr.98 (talk) 12:31, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If this was back when the Soviets were working on the bomb, and the US had the ability to slow it down through assassinations, I bet they would have. The CIA did, after all, have several plans for assassinating Castro, and killing Soviet nuclear scientists wouldn't be any more of a provocation than that. StuRat (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If you're asking about a potential Iranian nuclear weapon, those in the US intelligence community, the Israeli intelligence community, the IAEA, and the US arms control community all more or less agree that Iran used to have a weapons program, that it was "paused" in 2003, and that there isn't much evidence they've been pushing forward on a specifically clandestine, military front since then. What they have been doing is enriching uranium for use in research reactors in safeguarded sites (there are cameras in there that the IAEA can monitor in real time, and the IAEA monitors how much uranium goes in and out of the facilities). They have developed at least one other site "in secret," in the sense that they weren't immediately disclosed to the IAEA, but there are questions as to how quickly one must disclose a site to the IAEA (they were not yet enriching uranium at the site when it was undisclosed).

Enriching uranium for reactors under safeguarded conditions is allowed as "peaceful" activity under the NPT. Now there is a lot of concern that Iran's civilian program efforts are really just a front to get into a position where they can later divert the material into a weapons program — that they will be a "nuclear capable" state (like Japan, Germany, Brazil, and Canada) even though they lack an actual weapons program. Once you are "nuclear capable," it's possible to kick out all the inspectors and work on fabricating a bomb (like North Korea did). But they aren't even there, yet, and there's little chance that they'd be able to divert the material or kick out the inspectors without everyone knowing pretty immediately. There is no evidence that they are in a position to actually make a nuclear weapon soon. Many people (myself included) suspect that Iran is not aiming to be an overt nuclear weapons state, but is cultivating nuclear ambiguity in the same manner that Israel does.

Those are the facts on the ground, and there is plenty of room for interpretation about what Iran's intentions are. There is a lot of spin in the newspapers back and forth over this as of late; but if you read the IAEA reports (which I encourage you to do, whenever they are written up as some sort of "new" revelation), make sure to pay attention to whether they say any weapons work was pre-2003 (which has been disclosed and is known about) or post-2003. Pre-2003 is troubling but only post-2003 is "new" or "current". A lot of the news coverage has been very dismaying for those who actually understand the technical issues and the history of this — very hyperbolic, very misleading, very war-mongering. --Mr.98 (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

IAEA, (In case anyone was wondering, like me.) —Akrabbim^talk 13:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

StuRat and Mr. 98 are correct that local allies of Iran have launched isolated attacks (usually in the form of missiles and suicide bombers) on Israeli targets, and there is strong circumstantial evidence that Israel has been behind assassinations of Iranians. However, there is virtually no chance that Iran will be in a position during 2012 to attack Israel directly with a nuclear weapon. There is very little reason to think that Iran would provoke a conventional military conflict with Israel, though if Israel were to attack Iran first, Iran would likely respond with counterattacks on Israel. Marco polo (talk) 15:23, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I could see Iran attacking Israel with conventional weapons, just as Iraq did during the Gulf War, to try to make it into a Muslim versus "crusader" conflict, thus gaining the rest of the Muslim world as allies, since they are quite short of allies at the moment, especially if Bashar al-Assad falls in Syria. The combo of being Shiite and trying to obtain a nuclear weapon has made them quite unpopular among many Sunni nations in the area. StuRat (talk) 21:04, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting Iran is likely to invade some other country and when someone else retaliates they will attack Israel? Or that someone else is likely to invade or attack Iran (without Iran first invading another country) prompting Iran to attack Israel? Nil Einne (talk) 14:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The most likely scenario is as follows:

1) Iran mines the straight to cut off oil shipments, in response to crippling sanctions over it's nuclear program.

2) US/NATO/UN minesweepers go in to clear the mines.

3) Iran either fires on the minesweepers, claiming they were in Iranian waters, or the US/NATO/UN forces fire on an Iranian ships laying mines, claiming they were in international waters.

4) War ensues, with Iran hopelessly outclassed militarily.

5) To even things up, Iran shoots missiles at Israel, hoping to bring them in and gain Muslim sympathy for their side. While not likely to bring other nations directly into the fight on their side, it might succeed in preventing those nations from allowing use of their bases, allowing overflight, supporting UN resolutions against Iran, etc. An Arab League resolution against the war or OPEC embargo would be better still. StuRat (talk) 21:05, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Soapbox soapbox soapbox. --PalaceGuard008 (Talk) 10:45, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reference desk does not answer requests for opinions or predictions about future events, HAH! Royor (talk) 04:54, 7 March 2012 (UTC) [reply]

Q: "When will sunset be on March 8th, 2012, at Stonehenge ?"

A: "How could we possible predict a future event like that ?" :-) StuRat (talk) 07:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC) [reply]

At about twilight time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:49, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Those who are reading, and are interested in, this thread (I simply haven't the strength myself) may find some interest in today's BBC article: How Iran might respond to Israeli attack - Cucumber Mike (talk) 10:37, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was not aware that WP:NOTFORUM and WP:NOTSOAPBOX had been demoted to from policies to essays. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:58, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Bull kills man? Or did he live[edit]

This can't be real can it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.65.234.81 (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the horn is impaling the person's head, and it looks like his eye is popping out... that's probably a bad sign. --Ouro (blah blah) 08:51, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

He lost the eye and part of his face was paralyzed, but he lived and eventually returned to the ring.[1] --Itinerant1 (talk) 10:39, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would title that picture "just deserts." I enjoyed that almost as much as reading a while back about how a person who ran cockfights was killed by one of their own roosters. Thanks for the laughs. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As for the bull, I'm guessing he was very good with A1. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:24, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I actually kind of doubt that. The level of stress hormones in a bovine's blood stream just before it dies has been shown to effect the quality of the meat. A severely stressed animal will tend to taste bitter. That's why kobe beef is so damn good, they never see it coming. That's also why a lot of modern slaughterhouses process animals one at a time, out of sight of one another, and kill them with an air hammer to the forehead. Quiet, quick, and the other cows don't have a clue. (as you may have picked up I have no objection to eating animals, I just don't think we should torment them while they are alive, for both philosophical and culinary reasons.) Beeblebrox (talk) 03:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer pictures and videos from kin phone to PC[edit]

I am trying to transfer my pictures and videos to my Toshiba laptop and it is telling me i need to download the drivers for the phone. Or put the disc in. I did not get a disc with my phone nor do I have a direction book, so there are several things I cannot do on my phone for lack of directions. The web cannot find the drivers for my phone, so how would I do that? Also I am trying to send videos and cannot find a way to send saved videos. I can send pictures but I do not get anything that lets me send a video?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.185.153.6 (talk) 17:32, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you can use Zune to transfer files. Go to http://www.zune.net/en-us/products/kin/ and click 'Get started with Kin', then follow the instructions. You can download a user manual at http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Microsoft-KIN-ONE_id4558/manual (for Kin ONE) and http://www.phonearena.com/phones/Microsoft-KIN-TWO_id4559/manual (for Kin TWO) - Cucumber Mike (talk) 17:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

cardinal sin[edit]

cardinal sin If anyone gets whats funny about him, can you give me more example of this? (hint: check the name) 203.112.82.2 (talk) 20:27, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I take it you mean where their surname combines with their rank/title to provide a common phrase, particularly one related to their profession ? I suspect there are many more of these in fiction or show biz (wrestlers, porn stars, etc.) than in real life. Corporal Punishment (wrestler) is one example. StuRat (talk) 20:53, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Some related concepts are nominative determinism and aptronym. (The latter has a list of such.) -- 140.142.20.101 (talk) 22:56, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Such as the ancient and recurring joke about a dentist named "Dr. Payne". ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:28, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've always been tickled by the motor racing driver Will Power, who certainly needs a lot in his profession. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.66.145 (talk) 01:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then there are those names where both parts (or at least homophones thereof) relate to each other, but not to anything the person is known for.

For example, Lorne Greene (= lawn green) and Gale Storm (= gale storm). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 01:56, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In Finland, there are meteorologist Pekka Pouta ("Pekka Fair-weather") and gardener Arno Kasvi ("Arno Plant"). These really are their names, not pseudonyms or artist names. JIP | Talk 06:54, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Jaime Sin would be pronounced "high - may sin" which starts to sound a lot like "I'm a sin". There is a funeral director in Salisbury, UK called Will Case and somewhere else in the UK is a gardener/broadcaster called Bob Flowerdew Richard Avery (talk) 08:06, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's more like "High - meh". But yeah, still sounds like "I'm a sin".-- OBSIDIAN†SOUL 20:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Or the proctologist who works for University Hospital Coventry and Warwickshire called Mr Shatwell... the estate agents in Kidderminster, UK called Doolittle and Dalley... --TammyMoet (talk) 11:48, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The book "The Geology of Southern Africa" by Edgar D. Mountain - I kid you not, there's a copy on the shelf right behind me! Roger (talk) 11:57, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is a relevant article here. I particularly liked the reference to the urology article by Splatt and Weedon. Ghmyrtle (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And there's the close Harman-Ising collaboration. They should have joined a barbershop quartet. Deor (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That happy coincidence was not lost on the two collaborators:[2] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:19, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Reverend Banana was arrested for a crime which may or may not relate to his name. I ♦A 12:33, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There was a Ms. C. Breeze at my college when I was studying there. Equisetum (talk | contributions) 13:21, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I happen to be a descendant of the illustrious Dr. Ill. Marco polo (talk) 16:02, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The book Dear Mr. Ripley, about Robert Ripley and the various oddities he reported on/collected has an entire chapter on these kinds of ironic names. Don't have it front of me now, but I remember a portrait of a ham salesman/distributor named Sam Heller ("Ham Seller") Beeblebrox (talk) 17:14, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And I always thought that this NASCAR driver should have been sponsored by "Depends" adult diapers. --Jayron32 20:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

When I started work in the 1970s, the two senior managers in the office were Mr Golley and Mr Ghosh. Alansplodge (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I was tempted to apply for a job as fish biologist just so I could be work with a Dr Salmon. A lack of any skills what so ever in fish biology and an urgent need to apply for a real job I could actually do, tempered my passing enthusiasm. Astronaut (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Dr. Brain was a noted neurologist. He edited the journal "Brain." I once read an article about such names, and at the time the US Army included in its ranks a "Private Eye" and a "Sergeant Major." Edison (talk) 01:16, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there a character in Catch-22 called 'Major Major Major' who was quickly promoted to the rank of major, becoming 'Major Major Major Major'? Astronaut (talk) 13:09, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then there's Wright Hassall Solicitors in Leamington Spa... [3]. Astronaut (talk) 13:03, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Immunity to tapeworms[edit]

Can a human be immune to tapeworms? Or, can a human with tapeworms fight them off with only her immune system and no outside help? (it's for a book) 169.231.10.169 (talk) 21:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Our article on Tapeworm infection needs expanding with this information because researchhas shown that "absolute resistance to the larval stage can be acquired and resistance to a number of cestode species can be artificially induced in a number of hosts" (more detail here). I assume you were not thinking of the beneficial effects or the scientist who deliberately infected himself with a tapeworm for his visit to India and tested its beneficial effects by drinking water from the Ganges. Dbfirs 23:59, 5 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

For a pop culture reference to this appetizing subject, go to about 1:40 of this clip:[4] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:42, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]