www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/04_43/b3905109_mz063.htm
. . . .
. . . .
The saga of the computing industry is rich with outsize characters and surprising plot turns, but there's one story that has risen over time to mythic proportions. It's the tale of how software pioneer Gary Kildall missed out on the opportunity to supply IBM (IBM ) with the operating system for its first PC -- essentially handing the chance of a lifetime, and control of tech's future, to rival Bill Gates and Microsoft Corp. (MSFT ). In the process, he may have missed out on becoming the world's richest man.
The legend goes like this: One fateful day in the summer of 1980, three buttoned-down IBMers called on a band of hippie programmers at Digital Research Inc. located in Pacific Grove, Calif. They hoped to discuss licensing DRI's industry-leading operating system, CP/M. Instead, DRI founder Gary Kildall blew off IBM to gallivant around in his airplane, and the frustrated IBMers turned to Gates for their operating system. This anecdote has been told so often that techies need only be reminded of "the day Gary Kildall went flying" to recall the rest. While he's revered for his technical innovations, many believe Kildall made one of the biggest mistakes in the history of commerce.But what if that's not what happened?
. . . .
What if IBM and Microsoft deprived Kildall not only of untold riches but also of the credit for a seminal role in the PC revolution? That's the thesis of a chapter about Kildall in They Made America, a serious coffee table history book by renowned author and former newspaper editor Harold Evans. The book, published by Little Brown on Oct. 12, profiles 70 American innovators and is the inspiration for an upcoming PBS series.
And while other tech authors have debunked the gallivanting story before, Evans bases his Kildall chapter on a 226-page, never-published memoir written by Kildall just before his death in 1994. Early on, Kildall seemed to represent the best hopes of the nascent computer industry. But by the time he died at age 52, after falling in a tavern, he had become embittered and struggled with alcohol. They Made America is certain to elicit cries of protest. That's because it attacks the reputations of some of the key players of the early PC era -- Gates, IBM, and Tim Paterson, the Seattle programmer who wrote an operating system, QDOS, based partly on CP/M that became Microsoft's DOS.
Evans asserts that Paterson copied parts of CP/M and that IBM tricked Kildall. Because Gates rather than the more innovative Kildall prevailed, according to the book, the world's PC users endured "more than a decade of crashes with incalculable economic cost in lost data and lost opportunities." David G. Lefer, one of Evans' two collaborators, says: "We're trying to set the record straight. Gates didn't invent the PC operating system, and any history that says he did is wrong. "There's no doubt that Kildall was one of the pioneers of the industry. He invented the first operating system for microcomputers in the early 1970s, making it possible for hobbyists and companies to build the first personal computers.
Legalities aside, Microsoft's original DOS was based in part on Kildall's CP/M. His insight was that by creating an operating system separate from the hardware, applications could run on computers that were made by different manufacturers. "What really drove Gary was inventing things," says friend and former DRI executive Tom Rolander in an interview with BusinessWeek.Still, Evans' book falls short of clarifying exactly how Kildall lost out to Gates. He relies primarily on Kildall's memoir, his family, and his friends. Evans says he requested an interview with Gates, which he says Microsoft denied. He didn't make contact with IBM or Paterson, but tapped previously published accounts for that side of the story.
. . . .
IBM would not talk to BusinessWeek for this article, but former IBMers take issue with Kildall's version of events. Microsoft calls the book "one-sided and inaccurate," and says the company is proud of the "foundational role" it played in the industry. Paterson denies he stole Kildall's intellectual property. He says he's stunned that the authors failed to get in touch with him. "You'd think they might have asked. I'm not hard to find," he says.HAZY MEMORIES What's hard to find is the truth.
A dozen interviews by BusinessWeek with people on all sides paint a blurry picture of those crucial days in the summer of 1980. While Kildall claims in his memoir that he met with IBM that first day and reached a handshake agreement, DRI's own lawyer at the time, Gerry Davis, says there was no deal. One of the IBMers who visited DRI that day insists he didn't talk to Kildall, but another, Jack Sams, now retired, says it's possible he was introduced to Kildall, although he doesn't remember it.
Sams says faulty memories and self-serving accounts make it nearly impossible to tell exactly what happened during those chaotic weeks. "Back in those days, there was a lot of misinformation that was deliberate," he says, pointing out that IBM originally claimed it had made the PC all by itself. "We spun it, Kildall spun it, and Microsoft spun it."The story begins unambiguously. A group of IBMers, working on a secret project to build a personal computer, flew to Seattle in August, 1980, to see if Gates could supply them with an operating system. He couldn't -- and referred them to Kildall.
When they showed up at DRI's offices the next day, Kildall's then-wife, Dorothy McEwen, the company's business manager, refused to sign their nondisclosure agreement. She is now ill with brain cancer and can't remember the events, according to daughter Kristin Kildall. But Rolander, who flew with Kildall on a business trip that morning, tells BusinessWeek they returned in the afternoon and Kildall did meet with IBM. If Kildall struck a handshake deal that day, it didn't stick. Sams says he did get together with Kildall in Pacific Grove a short time later, but they couldn't reach an agreement.
At around the same time, he saw Gates again. He and Gates both knew of the operating system Paterson had built at Seattle Computer Co. As Sams recounts, "Gates said: 'Do you want to get [QDOS], or do you want me to?' I said: 'By all means, you get it."' Gates bought Paterson's program, called QDOS, for $50,000, renamed it DOS, improved it, and licensed it to IBM for a low per-copy royalty fee.THE SHOUTING It wasn't until nearly a year later that Kildall discovered that Gates, a longtime friend, had plucked the plum software deal out of his grasp.
IBM sent test versions of its PC out shortly before it was announced in August, 1981, and a consultant working for DRI noticed the operating system was remarkably similar to CP/M. The consultant, Andy Johnson-Laird, remembers that Kildall looked at the screen and was stunned. "There were some shallow changes, but it was essentially the same program," says Johnson-Laird in an interview with BusinessWeek. Kildall was furious. He and DRI's vice-president for marketing, John Katsaros, met with Gates in a Seattle restaurant to hash things out.
"It was one of those meetings where everybody was nice to each other, then everyone shouted at each other, then everyone was nice to each other, then everyone shouted at each other," recalls Katsaros in a BusinessWeek interview. Nothing was resolved. Kildall also confronted IBM. But his problem was that software copyright had just become law three years earlier, and it wasn't clear what constituted infringement.
Davis, the DRI lawyer, believes that based on the number of similarities DRI's forensic consultants found between the original DOS and CP/M, "in today's world, you could take it to court and get an infringement." But not in 1981. So rather than sue, Kildall agreed to license CP/M to Big Blue. He was floored when the PC was released and IBM charged $240 per copy for CP/M and just $40 for DOS. Kildall's conclusion, according to his memoir: "I believe the entire scenario was contrived by IBM to garner the existing standard at almost no cost."Within a couple of years, the IBM PC was the undisputed champ, and Microsoft was the leading operating system provider and on its way toward PC industry domination. CP/M gradually faded into irrelevance. Kildall ultimately sold his company to Novell Inc. (NOVL ) in 1991 for $120 million.
He went on to create some pioneering multimedia technology, but never again was an industry player. Friends say that, for years, he cringed when people brought up the "flying when IBM visited" story.The last straw was when the University of Washington in 1992 invited Kildall to attend the 25th anniversary of its computer science program. He was one of its earliest and most distinguished graduates, earning a PhD, yet they had picked as keynote speaker Gates, a Harvard dropout. Kildall says it was this dig that prompted him to write his memoir. "Well, it seems to me that he did have an education to get there. It happened to be mine, not his," Kildall wrote. Kildall's resentment is understandable, but even his friends agree that he was partly to blame. For all his technical brilliance, he was a poor businessman.
One big mistake was not moving ahead fast enough with a more advanced version of CP/M. He was slow to deliver a 16-bit operating system. It was that delay that created an opening for Paterson to design a 16-bit alternative, and because DRI didn't have its own version ready in the summer of 1980 IBM decided to deal with Gates, says Sams. Once IBM agreed to market his software, Kildall demanded a relatively high royalty -- contributing to its being priced so high, say former DRI execs. Would history have taken a different path if Kildall triumphed in those early days? "I'm convinced," says John Wharton, a tech consultant and Kildall pal. He believes the industry would have been more collegial and innovative if Kildall rather than Gates sat at the crossroads of computing.
But others say Kildall didn't have what it took to lead an industry. "Bill succeeded because he was a tenacious businessman," says lawyer Davis. "Gary was not tenacious." As for Kildall's family, they're grateful his story is finally being told. "The truth is different for everybody," says daughter Kristin. "I think everybody believes they're presenting the truth. Obviously, they're different. I don't know why. I'm just glad my truth is out there." History may typically be written by the victors. But in this case, Gary Kildall has secured -- and deserves -- more than just a footnote.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is a Wolf More Intelligent Than a Dog?
. . . .
. . . .
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
That depends on what breed of dog. Not all breeds have the same level of intelligence.Also, every animal is smart in their own way. A wolf is not smart in a domestic sense. I'm sure it would be very difficult to house train a wolf. A domestic dog is not smart to be able to survive on its own in the wild the way the wolf can. So I would say they are 50% 50%. at being intelligent, one is not any intelligent than the other. I love dogs, and I love wolves and I'm not going to take sides here.
Edit: Thank you Lisa, you too! :)
. . . .
. . . .
I will say yes. When wolves hunt, their behavior indicates that a great deal of forethought and problem solving ability is involved. For example, they use social cooperation to conduct and perhaps “plan” coordinated attacks. When running into a herd of prey, they continuously test the animals and make decisions on which single animal they eventually will kill. They test them by smell, scattering the herd and looking for weaknesses, and sometimes by waiting. After scattering a herd, wolves may stand and watch their prey, waiting for a weak individual to reveal itself. Once a lone animal is selected, the wolves may chase it only so far.
. . . .
Well of course, but they must have higher intelligence in order to survive in the wild. OMG Santana what a beautiful dog!!
. . . .
. . . .
Wolves have larger brains than dogs, and the definately use them differently. I am not sure I would say wolves are "smarter" but physically they do have bigger brains
Dogs originated from wolves, and have been domesticated.
. . . .
I would say yes (I have 3 wolf hybrids and 7 mutts). Wolves in the wild have to survive with their smarts. Dogs just really have to look cute to get their food (most of the time) In my pack the oldest wolf hybrid is the pack leader (after the humans of course).
Wolves are pretty smart, but it depends on the breed of the dog. Not all of their intelligence is on the same level.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt! Wolves hunt in packs and have very good problem solving skills, enough said! I think wolves are because they have to survive in the wild by themselves, when dogs just lay around lazily :PSo probably wolves. If I'm wrong then they are equally intelligent.
. . . .
Yep, they are. Wolves have bigger heads and bigger brains than dogs(even breeds which are a lot bigger than a wolf still have smaller brains). Wolves also watch people or other animals do things and learn whereas dogs don't tend to pick up things as much by just observing.
. . . .
. . . .
Just ask the Indians! They had bred wolves with dogs for hundreds of years, and for a good reason; dogs were not as smart as wolves.
TEN MOST INTELLIGENT DOGS:
1. Ungava Husky, or Wolf Dog
2. German Shepherd
3. Golden Retriever
4. Labrador Retriever
5. Border Collie
6. Poodle
7. Doberman Pinscher
8. Papillon
9. Nova Scotia Duck Tolling Retriever
10. Alaskan Malamute
If you want a good read on the intelligence of wolves, read "In Praise of Wolves" by RD Lawrence. You'll be in awe, I guarantee. Unbelievably awesome book.
. . . .
It really depends what you mean by intelligence. You're probably never gonna train a wolf to do an agility course, heard sheep or play fetch but thats just because they are a wild animal.
...
In general they are about the same, but they have adapted to different ways of life. Wolves live in the wild, while domesticated dogs have adapted to life with humans. Wolves have to be able to surive on their own, so their survival tactics are more self-reliant. Dogs have to rely on people, so their survivial tactics rely on communication with us. Even six-week-old puppies know to observe humans and look at what the human is watching. Since the 1980s, some animal behaviorists thought that wolves were smarter.
This was because of studies which showed that wolves could unlock a gate after watching a human do it once, while dogs remained stumped after watching repeatedly. However, in 1997 Vilmos Csanyi suspected that this had nothing to do with intelligence, but instead was related to the dogs' relationship with humans. So he and his colleagues tested 28 dogs of various ages, breeds, and closeness to their owners, to see if they could learn to open a fence gate to get to food while their owners were present.
Similarly to the wolves, "outdoor dogs" appeared to be smarter because they appeared to learn how to open the gate faster than dogs with a close relationship to their owners. " BUT when the dogs' owners were allowed to give their dogs permission to go ahead and open the gate, the gap between the groups vanished. " Adám Miklósi, a biologist at the Hungarian Eötvös Loránd University in Budapest and one of the pioneers of modern dog research, demonstrated that wolves, on the other hand, lack these communicative abilities, nor are they capable of learning them. He had 13 of his students each raise one wolf puppy.
The students fed the wolves with bottles, took them home and onto the subway, and taught them to walk on a leash and respond to basic commands. After a few months the researchers had the young wolves and a group of young dogs attempt the same task. First both groups were taught to remove a piece of meat from a container. After a while, the investigators closed the containers. While the young wolves kept trying to get to the food, the dogs stopped immediately, sat down in front of their human trainers and stared at them. "The wolves were only interested in the meat," says Miklósi, "and, of course, so were the dogs, but apparently they knew that they would reach their goal more quickly by communicating with the people."
Source(s):http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1026/p17s0
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...5
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By John P.
Posted on Mar 29, 2008 - 9:30am
http://onemansblog.com/2008/03/29/45-ways-to-power-up-your-blog/
45 Ways to Power Up Your Blog
. . . .
. . . .
Today I’ll be attending WordCamp Dallas, which Charles Stricklin and I jointly organized. We’ve got a whole line up of fantastic speakers including Matt Mullenweg, Jonathan Bailey, Cali Lewis and Neal Campbell, Liz Strauss, Lorelle VanFossen, Chris Smith, Aaron Brazell, Jacob Santos, and Mark Ghosh. If you’re one of the WordCamp attendees and you happen to be sitting in the lecture hall reading along as I stand here on stage, well… deja vu! Otherwise, for my normal readers here comes a list of 45 Ways to Power Up Your Blog! If all goes well we’ll be recording the lecture and will be able to append the video to this post later.For the sake of keeping things organized, I’ll tackle these tips by category and also attempt to cram in as many links to additional resources for each tip as possible. If you happen to have a link to add to a particular tip please drop a comment below with the link and where it should go. This post is by far the most comprehensive article I’ve assembled on blogging. It does make reference to a few of my previous posts, but much of this information is brand new. One other little warning… a lot of the tips presented below are only available to the stand-alone version of WordPress. If you are running a different blogging platform (I suggest you change it), or if you are on the free WordPress.com platform, you may have to seek alternatives.
Search Engine Optimization
Yes, It’s Still Important. To get us started, check out the article I wrote for Lorelle called Why Search Engine Optimization (SEO) is Still Important. The impetus for this article was the fact that so many WordPress themes were claiming to be SEO friendly, but so few people understand what that really entails. I don’t trust most of the SEO information out there, but I do trust these links:
Use English Naming Conventions for Images
Every image on your site should be named exactly what it is - in English. So instead of "img0001.jpg" rename it to "Cute-Dog.jpg". Also, use the alt text for descriptions of all images, and Title element for all hyperlinks. These are legal ways to increase the keyword density of a page - but make sure you aren’t cheating! The descriptions must be accurate or you may incur the wrath of the Google anti-spam team!
[....]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Think It's Cruel to Boil a Lobster?
. . . .
. . . .
No. It would be worse to eat them live.
. . . .
. . . .
If they are still alive yes!!!
. . . .
. . . .
Nope, its called cooking.
. . . .
. . . .
No it's delicious
. . . .
Sometimes
. . . .
No, every living being has to die someday. Well, you might as well eat them. Without other living beings, we wouldn't be here right now. We have to eat something right?
. . . .
. . . .
No. It is the only way you are able to cook them. if they are killed before you cook them, enzymes start breaking down the muscle and turn the meat bad. Lobsters live longer than any seafood after they are caught.
. . . .
. . . .
Yes, but it is tasty
. . . .
. . . .
Yeah
. . . .
. . . .
How would you like to get thrown in a huge pot of boiling water while you were still alive?
. . . .
. . . .
No... you cook other animals.. so why not
. . . .
. . . .
Yea the suffocation they go through
. . . .
. . . .
That is just mean i would never kill a living thing like that just to eat them
. . . .
. . . .
I went to Red Lobster for the first time in my life a few years ago....I've never been since. I thought it was so mean of them to place the tank of the live lobsters right where you wait to be seated. It's basically like, while you wait to be seated, you pick your prey for the night. I couldn't imagine myself sitting in the restaurant, knowing that it was being killed, while I waited there. Mind you, I am not a big seafood eater; what was I doing at R.L? I don't know either. Maybe my analogy was a little harsh? And no, I am not a vegetarian. I like meat. However, I don't like to think of the process of how it was "killed" - for lack of a better word - before it gets to my plate. I'm very sensitive when it comes to that.
. . . .
. . . .
Does the lobster feel pain? probably, but to call it cruel depends on a few things. If you're simply boiling a live lobster to take enjoyment out of its pain and killing it then yes you could call it cruel. But if your doing it to cook and eat the lobster its not. Humans are animals too and this is how we eat our prey. It might be a lot different than a wolf straight up killing a sheep and eating it raw but it a sense its the same thing.
. . . .
. . . .
No, duh. The lobster sits in the cool water while it warms up as lethargy sets in it goes to sleep and dies. Its a peaceful death. Don't be so crabby about it.
. . . .
. . . .
Sounds like you haven't tasted any. Once you eat one, you won't care.
. . . .
. . . .
Umm LOBSTER yummmmm, is it cruel to slater cows, pigs, chicken, or anything we eat, I guess if you are a veggie person, but hey each to their own., What one person likes to eat the other may not.
. . . .
. . . .
You can think that, but you are using it for food . This can be used for all edible animals
- Is chopping off the head of a chicken cruel? We need to do it eventually so we can eat it
- Is killing a cow cruel? We need to do it to get steak and other beef products
- Is gutting a fish cruel? We need to do it to eat it
It may be "cruel", but unless you want to be a vegetarian, you are going to have to accept some cruelty, if you feel uncomfortable doing it, you may want to have somebody boil it for you
. . . .
. . . .
It's no different from you boiling any other food (including other meats) that you are prepared to eat as a snack or meal. you would want to cook/steam those two like any other seafood while they are raw and alive for freshness....if they are already dead then you might want to think twice on the purchase or ask just how long they have been dead....you don't want to eat anything that is bad or spoiled. no seafood should ever smell fishy while cooking and if so, then it's bad!!! if you're going to have a guilty conscience, then you should think of something else to eat.
. . . .
. . . .
No, it's actually the fastest and least painful way to kill them. I won a beautiful lobster once at a party, though, and I just couldn't kill him ... I hunted around and found a restaurant that had a lobster tank that was willing to take him and keep him and let him 'rule the tank' (no rubber bands on his claws, even) ... and yes, I marked him and went to see him every month for three years ... he was still there, still quite happy in his new tank ... but then I do think that lobster tastes nasty ... a crab or a crawfish or shrimp, and into the pot they go ... because I LOVE THE WAY THEY TASTE. I know I'm horrible ... but that's just the way it is ... and I am old enough not to care what others think. (I'm 57 and a retired psychologist).
. . . .
. . . .
If you plunge a sharp knife quickly between it's eyes it dies instantly. It will not feel the boiling water! The noise, as it goes into the water is air escaping from the shell. I could NEVER just drop a lobster or anything else in boiling water! Too much like Hitler!
. . . .
. . . .
Yes...Sorry, but I love crab and lobster and shrimp!! But it is cruel to put em in boiling water if they can feel it!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Is It Cruel to Boil Lobsters Alive?
. . . .
. . . .
NO living thing on earth wants to be boiled alive.
. . . .
. . . .
Yes , you should really rip there legs off first
. . . .
. . . .
mmmm, lobster, yummmmmyy
. . . .
. . . .
In some countries they rip them apart and eat them while still living. I guess it depends on what you consider cruel.
. . . .
. . . .
Yes I do think it is cruel to boil lobsters, but tell that to the maitre d' and the snazzy diners at a 5 Michelin star restaurant!! They're the ones decimating the poor critters.
. . . .
. . . .
Cruel yes but necessary for cooking. . . . .
. . . .
Hey, it's food. If I'm hungry enough, I'm gonna do what it takes to cook the lobster and then get to eat it. That being said, I've never really had lobster, but you get my point.
. . . .
. . . .
Lobsters live on the bottom of the ocean and are considered scavengers they eat garbage, boiling is nothing, eating them is another story
Yeah it's bloody...hehehe... But if you want to eat a lobster just go to the restaurant, at least someone cook it for you.
. . . .
. . . .
No its not... we have to cook our food.. It would be more cruel if we let them die slowly. :) If they're alive while its happening, then it is absolutely cruel.
. . . .
. . . .
If they look at you sad....yes
. . . .
. . . .
Nah how else do u kill them? its real quick, the squekes it makes is just air escaping out its shell
. . . .
. . . .
YES! - Every time I go into a seafood resteraunt and see the lobsters, I remembe that they are going to get eaten, and I feel so sad! I WILL NEVER EAT A LOBSTER!
. . . .
. . . .
I eat lobster and stuff but I would never be able to Boil one myself because they scream when you put them in the water and its just so sad. I mean if someone put you in boiling hot water you would scream too. poor creatures.
. . . .
. . . .
Do you think the FDA would allow cows and chickens to be slaughtered via boiling? I think not. So it must be cruel. Try to picture what it feels like to be boiled alive.
. . . .
. . . .
mmm! now im hungry.
No, I think it is more cruel for us to ignore God's teachings and go vegetarian.
We bought a live lobster once , we were told to keep it in the fridge as it would stay still and lifeless because of the cold, i kept opening the fridge door and looking at it , it was staring at me , i felt so sad for it i wanted to let it go, hubs said its already doomed there's nothing you can do for it if i let it go in our sea it wouldnt survive our waters and if i took it back to the shop someone else would eat it, so i agreed and he killed it , we heard on cookery programme on tv how to kill it and it wasn't dropping it in boiling water because it had been proven that they do suffer you actually have to put a skewer on top of the head and they wont suffer but believe me i will never get one again couldn't sleep for weeks after that
. . . .
. . . .
Its also cruel to eat them in the first place, but they taste good, so suffice it to say the lobster's demise, however painful it may or may not be, doesnt keep me up at night
. . . .
. . . .
No, the moment the lobster hits the water it is dead. No animal could survive at that temeture. Don't worry, they feel no pain.
. . . .
. . . .
If I am not mistaken, they have been doing it that way for years.
. . . .
. . . .
If we droped you in boiling water you would squeel just like that lobster does
. . . .
. . . .
No, you want to cook them fresh. What is fresher than being alive and cooked. That's is just how it is done.
. . . .
. . . .
Would YOU like to be boiled alive? Didn't think so.
. . . .
. . . .
Perhaps, I don't know
. . . .
. . . .
If you want to find out how cruel it is, put yourself in a huge pot of boiling water. really, what do you think?
. . . .
. . . .
umm yeah would you like it!
. . . .
. . . .
Yes, this site shows you the right way.
http://www.all-about-cooking.com/lobster...
. . . .
. . . .
You should let them die in bed of old age before you boil them.... Really, if lobsters can feel pain (the jury is out on this one), there is no reasonable way to kill them without causing some sort of pain. Just douse them, head first into a large pot of boiling water. It'll be over in a few seconds.
. . . .
. . . .
Their brain is about the size of a pen point so no. btw....try steaming about 1/2 way then finish on the grill! awesome.
. . . .
. . . .
Yes. It IS cruel to boil lobsters alive. The instant they hit the boiling water, they DO feel excruciating pain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Think It's a Good Idea to Place Isaac Newton's DNAs in a Sperm Bank?
He's only been dead for 300 years. It's possibled to isolate his genetic materials for cloning.
. . . .
. . . .
Actually there will be huge gaps in his DNA as bacteria will decomposed most of it. And to produce a clone, we wouldn't make a sperm cell, but rather place his DNA into a fertalized ovum with the nucleus removed. Anyway, the morals of it are complex, but there is no evidence that such a clone would produce a genius like newton again.
. . . .
. . . .
Do you mean clone him so that everyone is smart ? If so no I don't want it because as much as we need scientist, we do not need everyone to be scientist. Theory's would be coming out here there and every where, and then everyone would end up confused.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Do You Think People Should Colonize Antarctica?
This is certainly easier than to colonize any other terrestrial planet. Nuclear power can provide electricity and plants can be grown indoor by artificial sunlight.
. . . .
Not worth the time and money.
Would you go?
. . . .
. . . .
I'd go.
. . . .
. . . .
NO ITS COLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
. . . .
. . . .
If they want to freeze to death and love the below freezing snow on their feet then okay! I always wondered WHY nobody lives there though what you say is pretty interesting...
. . . .
. . . .
Absolutely not.....let's keep one place the humans haven't ruined free of the scourge.......
. . . .
. . . .
I'm sure China and India will do it first.
. . . .
. . . .
What you say is interesting and true, but how would they make heat?? They would probably freeze they're butts off!
. . . .
. . . .
We have the technology to do it but its a waste of time and money b/c theres limited if no resources there...and its barren isolated land, who wants to live there? and plus with global warming melting glaciers that'll just be a great risk
. . . .
. . . .
Actually, humans have a few colonies on Antarctica. The biggest base is the US run McMurdo Station, but many countries have facilities there. The facilities down there are mostly reserved for scientific research, so I don't see Antarctica becoming the next "hot" vacation destination.
. . . .
. . . .
Other than practice for an ET base, I'm not sure if there's any point in trying to make Antartica self sustaining.
. . . .
. . . .
No, too many people on the planet now. We should be asking how can we stop form colonizing. The human population growth of the last century has been truly phenomenal. It required only 40 years after 1950 for the population to double from 2.5 billion to 5 billion.
This doubling time is less than the average human lifetime. The world population passed 6 billion just before the end of the 20th century. Present estimates are for the population to reach 8-12 billion before the end of the 21st century. During each lecture hour, more than 10,000 new people enter the world, a rate of ~3 per second!
Of the 6 billion people, about half live in poverty and at least one fifth are severely undernourished. The rest live out their lives in comparative comfort and health. The factors affecting global human population are very simple. They are fertility, mortality, initial population, and time.
The current growth rate of ~1.3% per year is smaller than the peak which occurred a few decades ago (~2.1% per year in 1965-1970), but since this rate acts on a much larger population base, the absolute number of new people per year (~90 million) is at an all time high.
The stabilization of population will require a reduction in fertility globally. In the most optimistic view, this will take some time. The forms of life found on and around this frozen continent today possess unusual adaptations for surviving the rigours of cold temperatures, low humidity, ice sheets or salty soils characteristic of the region.
Birds and seals in Antarctica (and to a lesser extent in the sub-Antarctic) breed and raise their young on ice or land, but depend on the rich resources of the ocean for their food. The marine ecosystem is rich with life. Whales, fishes, cephalopods and krill have provided, and will continue to provide, resources for mankind.
The terrestrial life in Antarctica is simpler than that of the ocean. The appearance and the roles played by the organisms within their ecosystems, and the adaptations they show to the rigourous conditions are, however, of interest. Also on land, there are a variety of freshwater and saline lakes and ponds which contain a limited selection of aquatic forms.
The world must learn to use Antarctica's living resources wisely, to respect the delicate balance which these organisms occupy in Antarctic eco-systems, and to preserve or protect them from irreversible harm or damage. Unfortunately, there were periods in our history when respect for the balance of ecosystems was lacking, and costly lessons were learned through trial and error.
Antarctica's role in human history has been recent, so that, apart from the marine ecosystem, it remains relatively pristine. Today we are facing a challenge to manage resources, living and non-living, and to keep Antarctica unspoiled. Success in this undertaking will benefit both present and future generations. The Antarctic Treaty signed in Washington on 1 December 1959, states:
- I - Antarctica shall be used for peaceful purposes only; any military measures are prohibited.
- II - Freedom of scientific investigation in Antarctica and cooperation as applied during IGY shall continue.
- III - Plans for scientific programmes and the observations and results thereof shall be freely exchanged; scientists may be exchanged between expeditions.
- IV - All national claims are frozen from the date of signature. No future activity of any country during the life of the Treaty can affect the status quo on any rights or claims to territorial sovereignty.
- V - Nuclear explosions and disposal of radioactive waste are prohibited in Antarctica.
http://www.globalchange.umich.edu/global...
http://www.anta.canterbury.ac.nz/resourc...
. . . .
. . . .
Your question seems to ask about the availability of space for people to live in. We're not even close to running out of that on earth. Other things limit us, but not living space.
I'll address your question of Antartica here. Colonization basically means "moving somewhere and adapting enough to the difficulties of life to survive, prosper, and grow until independent of the mother society." Colonies are growing babies!
Throughout history colonies world wide have often failed, and that was in amicable environments (temperate and tropical zones with good soils, native foods, and few predators (including natives!) ) with knowledgible colonists who actually had carpentry, construction, and farming skills. (All skills normally associated with men.
What skills did women traditionally have that helped a colony survive? Healing, midwifery, farming? I'm at a loss. Help, anyone?) As for the Antartic, the settlements there are more properly known as "bases". They must constantly be resupplied from the mother society. They have no hope of becoming independent or adapting to that environment enough to survive alone.
Even the Inuit of North America would have an extremly difficult time surviving. As a frozen landmass (emphasis on FROZEN, most temperatures are pick-a-number BELOW ZERO) with no vegetation other than basically seaweed and lichen, no warm fresh liquid water, and no materials available for energy production, the Antartic might as well be on another planet.
Except for the air and the distance, it would be just as easy (maybe easier) to colonize Mars. Whether colonizing Antartica or Mars, the ultimate question would be: if we were cut off from our supplier, how long could our farmers, mechanics, and technicians feed us and keep the machines running?
Finally, in ten thousand years humans have completely colonized this planet. And, although it is lost in time, we have probably explored the entire planet. If there is an area without human impact or presence, it is because it was essentially an alien planet.
The only three areas that qualify for that are extremely high mountainous altitudes (the Himalayas et al), extremely dry deserts (the Empty Quarter of Saudi Arabia et al), and extremely cold environments (the Antartic et al). So, as for colonizing Antartica, if it wasn't does thousands of years ago it'll probably never be done. Not while it's frozen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Would Aliens Want Pyramids On Earth? Why Do You Think Aliens Would Want to Have Pyramids On Earth?
. . . .
. . . .
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
The Pyramids
According to common perception they were built, with the begrudging help of great armies of slaves, by the ancient pharaohs of Egypt as tombs for preserving their royal bodies. Pyramids were meant to be monuments to the pharaoh's greatness, filled with great treasures for the afterlife. To construct these massive shrines, the pharaoh's copied the oldest and largest pyramid of all, the Great Pyramid of Giza. But the Great Pyramid itself contains no pharaoh's body, no treasure chamber, and no treasures. Who, then, designed it and built it? What was its purpose? Let us begin our tour by considering a few basic facts about the Great Pyramid.
The Last "Wonder of the World"
Thirty times larger than the Empire State Building, the Pyramid's features are so large they can be seen from the Moon. Its base covers 13.6 acres (equal to seven midtown Manhattan city blocks), each side being greater than five acres in area. A highway lane eight feet wide and four inches thick could be built from San Francisco to New York and put inside the Great Pyramid. The oldest structure in existence, having been started 4,617 years ago, it is the sole remnant of the Seven Wonders of the World.
Journey to the Center of the Earth
Only a solid stone mountain could endure the Pyramid's immense weight. And indeed, a flat solid granite mountain happens to be located just beneath the surface of the ground directly under the Pyramid. It is built to face true North. The Pyramid is located at the exact center of the Earth's land mass. That is, its East-West axis corresponds to the longest land parallel across the Earth, passing through Africa, Asia, and America. Similarly, the longest land meridian on Earth, through Asia, Africa, Europa, and Antarctica, also passes right through the Pyramid. Since the Earth has enough land area to provide 3 billion possible building sites for the Pyramid, the odds of it's having been built where it is are 1 in 3 billion.
Construction Unequaled by Modern Technology
Like 20th century bridge designs, the Pyramid's cornerstones have balls and sockets built into them. Several football fields long, the Pyramid is subject to expansion and contraction movements from heat and cold, as well as earthquakes, settling, and other such phenomena. After 4,600 years it's structure would have been significantly damaged without such construction. While the bulk of the Pyramid's core was constructed of 4,000- to 40,000-pound blocks of soft limestone, the outer layer of the Pyramid was made of a beautifully bright, protective layer of polished stone.
These outer "casing stones" are missing today because about 600 years ago they were stolen by Arabs, (This accounts for the very worn appearance of the Pyramid today, since the inner limestone blocks are not immune to attack by the elements-wind, rain, and sandstorm.) This protective covering was made up of 100-inch-thick, 20-ton block of hard, white limestone, similar to marble but superior in hardness and in durability against the elements. The Great Pyramid did not always look as "rough" as it does today. Originally it was encased with a layer of tight-fitting, highly polished 20-ton stone slabs.
The casing stones, 144,000 in all, were so brilliant that they could literally be seen from the mountains of Israel hundreds of miles away. On bright mornings and late afternoons, sunlight reflected by this vast mirrored surface of 5-1/4 acres distinguished the Pyramid as being visible from the moon.(Note: For those interested in possible symbolic significance, in Bible prophecy 144,000 is the number of people-12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel-who are supposed to evangelize the world at the end time.)
The people of the area had viewed the Pyramid and its polished stones with awe for centuries. But when a 13th century earthquake loosened some of these casing stones, the Arabs recognized a great quarry of pre-cut stones that could be used to finish off palaces and mosques. For instance, the casing stones were used to rebuild the new city of El Kaherah plus Cairo mosques and palaces, including the Mosque of Sultan Hasan. Amazingly, the outside surface stones are cut within 0.01 (1/100th) inch of perfectly straight and at nearly perfect right angles for all six sides. And they were placed together with an intentional gap between them of 0.02 inch.
Modern technology cannot place such 20-ton stones with greater accuracy than those in the Pyramid. Even more amazing is that the 0.02-inch gap was designed to allow space for glue to seal and hold the stones together. A white cement that connected the casing stones and made them watertight is still intact and stronger than the blocks that it joins. Let's pause from our tour for a moment's rest and reflection.
Whoever built the Pyramid used a technology that we still do not possess today to cut, move, and cement stones. Whoever built it also had some knowledge of the Earth, because it was built in the right spot-one of the few places that would support such a great weight. The builder also knew where the greatest land mass of the Earth was in both the North-South and East-West directions.Amazing. But we had better keep going. And joining us on the leg of our tour will be none other than Sir Issac Newton...
The Cosmic Yardstick
The Great Pyramid is one of the most comprehensively surveyed buildings in the World. Scientists over the centuries have taken thousands of measurements in their quest to find out more about its mysteries. Among those intrigued by the incredible accuracy of the Pyramid's construction was the great scientist and mathematician Sir Isaac Newton. Attempting to formulate his famous law of gravity, Newton needed to know the diameter of the Earth.
However, in the 1600's no measurement was accurate enough, especially since Newton theorized that the Earth's spin would cause an equatorial bulge. Having heard legends claiming that knowledge of the Earth, the past, and the future were contained in the Pyramid, Newton set out to investigate. After studying the detailed measurements made by the investigators before him, Newton recognized that many key measurements would be in round numbers if the standard unit of measure was just 0.001 (1/1,000) inch larger than the British inch-which just happens to be the Sacred Jewish Inch. (The Sacred Jewish Inch, 1/25 of a cubit, equals 1.00106 British inches.)
This discovery allowed the secrets of the Pyramid to be unlocked and revealed unmistakable and mathematical relationships. For instance: We know from geometry that there is a universal relationship between the diameter of a circle and its circumference. Consider this: The height of the Pyramid's apex is 5,812.98 inches, and each side is 9,131 inches from corner to corner (in a straight line). If the circumference of the Pyramid is divided by twice its height (the diameter of a circle is twice the radius), the result is 3.14159, which just happens to be pi. Incredibly, this calculation is accurate to six digits.
So the Pyramid is a square circle, and thus pi was designed into it 4,600 years ago. Pi is demonstrated many times throughout the Pyramid. Other numbers are also repeated throughout. Each of the Pyramids four walls, when measured as a straight line, are 9,131 inches, for a total of 36,524 inches. At first glance, this number may not seem significant, but move the decimal point over and you get 365.24. Modern science has shown us that the exact length of the solar year is 365.24 days. All of the evidence in the Great Pyramid shows that 4,600 years ago somebody knew a great deal about the Earth. But it gets better, much better:
The average height of land above sea level (Miami being low and the Himalayas being high), as can be measured only by modern-day satellites and computers, happens to be 5,449 inches. That is the exact height of the Pyramid. All four sides of the Pyramid are very slightly and evenly bowed in, or concave. This effect, which cannot be detected by looking at the Pyramid from the ground, was discovered around 1940 by a pilot taking aerial photos to check certain measurements. As measured by today's laser instruments, all of these perfectly cut and intentionally bowed stone blocks duplicate exactly the curvature of the earth.
The radius of this bow is equal to the radius of the Earth. This radius of curvature is what Newton had long been seeking. The Great Pyramid is located on the far right. Clearly, whoever built the Pyramid had access to information beyond that which earthlings possessed at the time, at least earthlings as we know them. Now, one can argue that we were visited by scientifically advanced beings from outer space who taught us their technology. That is possible from the evidence presented, perhaps even likely. If so, these advanced beings had the paramount goal of leaving behind a message that would endure for eons. Suppose these beings decided to leave a message.
The message would have to be universal yet simple. It would have to survive the centuries and be understandable by all the Earth's inhabitants despite language and cultural differences. The message would have to be understood by many languages that would not come into existence for centuries after the message was written.
So far the message indicates that whoever built the Pyramid knew the Earth well: the length of the year, the radius of curvature, the standard measurement techniques, the average height of the continents, and the center of the land mass. They were able to consruct something that we still cannot construct today, and they were able to tie all these things together in this single structure. Were they extraterrestrial, or perhaps even supernatural? The answer is not yet clear. However, thus far we have examined only the outside of the Pyramid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080212041143AAIt4Ya
Why Penguins Are Not in the North Pole? If You Answer Right You'll Win a Penguin..lol
. . . .
. . . .
Best Answer - Chosen by Voters
Fossil evidence suggests that the first penguins evolved at a lattitude between 40 and 50 degrees South. From there penguins have spread to many places all over the Southern hemisphere, from the equator (Galápagos penguins) to the Antarctic mainland (the Adélie and Emperor, the only two species of penguin to live on the Antarctic mainland itself). Other penguins live on and around Antarctic islands, the coasts of Chile and Peru, The Falklands Islands, South Africa, Southern Australia and other Southern Ocean, south Altantic and south Pacific islands. Apart from zoos, escapees and the northernmost Galápagos islands, no penguins live in the northern hemisphere. Their habitats have no land predators, whom they would not be able to cope with, and the northern hemisphere is full of these, restricting further expansion. Also, warm waters are not as productive food-wise as cold waters, those penguins who live further north from Antarctica live on coasts where cold water is up-welling from the depths, allowing for the growth of lots of food. This is why the waters around the Galápagos islands on the equator are so cold.
. . . .
. . . .
There is no land at the North Pole.
. . . .
. . . .
Because they are in the south pole and the two are a very long way away and there would be no point in penguins travelling all that way across the world
. . . .
. . . .
Because its to far for them to swim to
. . . .
. . . .
Because they'd get eatem by the polar bears and eskimos.
. . . .
. . . .
Polar bears would eat them if they were
. . . .
. . . .
Immigration Control is very tight, and they can't get visas to visit.
. . . .
. . . .
They evolved there. Why are elephants not in the North Pole. It's just the way it is. Tectonic plate movements isolated penguins there.
. . . .
. . . .
Because that's their habitat...we dont even know if penguins know that there is another frozen barren in the roof of the world, it is too far for them to swim to it...
. . . .
. . . .
For the same reason that there are no polar bears in Antarctica, but in reverse. :-)
. . . .
. . . .
Penguins live in the south and have never colonized the North Pole for several reasons. A North Pole penguin is a rare and puzzling phenomenon.
- Penguins range too far south.
- Equatorial waters are too hot for penguins.
- Penguins don’t live with polar bears.
North Pole penguins There are occasional sightings of penguins in the northern Pacific, and penguins have been hauled aboard fishing boats in nets from time to time. Scientists believe that these birds came to the north as a result of a similar mishap—accidentally plucked from the ocean in the south, they are sometimes kept aboard boats for the amusement of the crew and eventually released far from home. If these penguins arrive in the Arctic, they will never get home for the same reasons they couldn’t have migrated there naturally. The water in between is too hot.
. . . .
. . . .
Well, I mean who's going to buy a Penguin all the way up there. Just pop into the local corner shop and buy a six pack, and anyway the polar bears can't get the wrappers off - LOL
