Easy Questions?

[Roland Deschain]

Titanic vs Darwin? LOL. That one's easy. Nature creates iceberg, man creates ship, iceberg attacks ship, ship proven to be poorly-designed and run. End of. Natural selection wins, therefore Darwin!

EDIT: It should be "children and their parents first", then a randomisation of the other passengers. It's the only way to ensure equality.

[Griffin NoName]

EDIT: It should be "children and their parents first", then a randomisation of the other passengers. It's the only way to ensure equality.

But there wouldn't be time for DNA tests

[Roland Deschain]

How about "everyone for themselves", then?

[Swatopluk]

How about "everyone for themselves", then?

That was the official practice and command before the incident that led to 'women and children first'.

[Griffin NoName]

............ a randomisation of the other passengers. It's the only way to ensure equality.

Every ship should carry a passenger randomization computer program. On arrival on the ship, every passenger is given their abandon ship priority number. 

[pieces o nine]

............ a randomisation of the other passengers. It's the only way to ensure equality.

Every ship should carry a passenger randomization computer program. On arrival on the ship, every passenger is given their abandon ship priority number. 

Wouldn't that have to be either sealed or encoded? Otherwise, some passengers would always seek out those with higher-priority numbers to exchange for ... perhaps some kind of financial incentive ... or perhaps without informed consent?

[Griffin NoName]

mmm of course!  deffo don't hand them out. 

[Aggie]

EDIT: It should be "children and their parents first", then a randomisation of the other passengers. It's the only way to ensure equality.

(being a little tongue in cheek here, and taking DNA's perspective)

Why parents? If the children are saved, both parent's genetic legacy has been carried forward (there may be an argument for allowing one parent to accompany a young child, in terms of parental support).  To prioritize parents who may be effectively post-reproduction is ridiculous.

Young adults of reproductive age should take quite as much of a priority as children.  In the case of multiple siblings on the same vessel, perhaps it should go to lottery or else the youngest female sibling gets priority. Women first is just sensible as there are more and more single mothers these days and it really doesn't take many men to accomplish reproduction. In addition, women carry forward the additional (very distinct) mitochondrial DNA lineage.  Men are really a waste of resources in a world where they are not required for child-rearing.

Those past the age of reproductive ability have no direct bearing on the genetic legacy of the human race - sorry.

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

But those oldsters do keep and maintain the cultural referents and the obscure things (culture-wise) that do not normally come up in day-to-day events.

So leaving them behind, you'd "chop off" those cultural memories/teachings/wisdom*, causing a cultural vacuum.  Ripe for exploitation by some nefarious power-hungry plot**.

I'm just sayin'-- it ain't all about passing on the DNA here.



______________________

* "wisdom" is used very loosely here

** example:  Constantine's power-grab of roughly 300CE.

[Aggie]

No, but in the context of a small-scale sea disaster? Why not?  Everyone has an emotional connection of some sort, and human value. In terms of wisdom, social significance and 'replace-ability', small children should not take up room in a lifeboat if there's a dearth of space.  In most cases, the parents may be young enough to have more. 

These days, perhaps it should just be based on who has the most friends on Facebook.

-------------------------------

Here's a funky question...  why does one of my armpits smell worse than the other?

This is sometimes fresh out of the shower, so the smell isn't old broken down sweat, but eliminated dietary elements (usually garlic and onion, although cumin is quite distinct when I've been eating lots of it). I don't use antiperspirant, and rarely use deodorant unless things are especially funky.

Do we have one particularly eliminatory pit? Am I the only one that notices this?

[Bob in a quantum-state-of-faith]

Could it be a bias in your nose?

In that one side of your nose is less sensitive than the other?  Or have you wiped your pits, and checked the moisture's odor directly?  (who hasn't done that just before an important date?  heh)

Or it could be due to proximity of the length of arteries coming from your liver, to either arm-- the liver is larger on one side of the body than the other, so I would presume an asymmetry in the arteries and/or veins between the liver and either arm, that is the path of the bloodflow (obviously through the heart).

I would assume the moisture comes from liquids in the blood, but it could be from the lymphatic system too-- which is easily as extensive as our blood vessels.

Come to think of it?  There is a lymph node under or near each armpit-- these are frequently removed in women experiencing breast removal due to cancer.

Could it be an infection or other inflammation of your lymph node under the more odoriferous arm?   I would check out your body near that area for unusual tenderness, or funny growths/lumps and such.

Odd smells are frequently a "tell" of something else going on-- but just as often, the "something else" is really nothing to worry about. 

[Swatopluk]

On what side is it? Is it your active side (the right if you are right-handed)? Since that side is developed more strongly, it could be that there are also more sweat glands (I assume you are not a Mongol. They lack those in the armpits). The smell in any case is caused by bacteria decomposing the sweat.

[Aggie]

I insist that I smell like food (with no sweat-decay odour) quite often directly after washing the pit repeatedly.  This isn't a new thing; I sweat out garlic and strong odours (as do many people).  It is indeed my active side.

[Griffin NoName]

Those past the age of reproductive ability have no direct bearing on the genetic legacy of the human race - sorry.

Don't see why you should apologise. The UK might as well kill off anyone post-reproductive given the way they treat the elderly it would be a lot kinder.

[Sibling DavidH]

Don't see why you should apologise. The UK might as well kill off anyone post-reproductive given the way they treat the elderly it would be a lot kinder.

Only the poor ones.  The wealthy get excellent treatment.