Zombie

Yep. But this is 2012, Bill. We have sports science, sports medicine and so much more. And still these (often a cabal of old men - look at FIFA - and words fail me sometimes to describe adequately my view of them) "sports regulators" fail to turn their attention to basic welfare of the sportsmen and women they regulate. Maybe too busy focusing on more important stuff - like doing TV deals with Murdoch or worse. But I digress. And this is not meant to be political

Second that

That's very strange. I felt really embarrassed watching this. And I had a big smile on my face throughout! And the last guy - the beefy jock - I was not expecting his reaction

I was watching men's gymnastics the other day *hmmm, wonders if maybe all those super-buff male bodies, muscles all pumped, groaning and grunting had something to do with it?* Anyway, there I was, enjoying it. Then I noticed all the straps and bandages the guys had on (modern HD tellys show everything ). And when a gymnast landed awkwardly it was obvious it hurt. Then I realized maybe some of those grunts and groans might be pain. And then I stopped enjoying it. I've just had a look around on Google. Seems there's a particular problem with "stick" landings. Here are just a couple of bits I found: Biomechanics of Sport and Exercise (2nd ed 2005), Peter McGinnis "Research funded in part by the United States Olympic Committee and the United States Gymnastic Association is concerned with the impact forces gymnasts experience when landing from stunts and what strategies they use to reduce these forces (cited 1991, 1993, 1994). Judges award higher points to gymnasts who "stick" their landings. But such landings may involve greater and more dangerous forces. These forces are the cause of overuse injuries in many gymnasts. A landing in which the gymnast flexes the knees, hips and ankles may reduce these impact forces but it also results in a lower score." http://books.google.... injury&f=false This book also went on to to say: "One outcome of this research has been new rules allowing for landing strategies that reduce these impact forces without penalty to the gymnast's score" BUT it does not appear to be true that using different landing strategies to avoid the damaging stick landing will not affect the scoring: Dummies.com - Men's Gymnastics Events in the 2012 Summer Olympics "Gymnasts display various grips on the bar and perform giant swings over the bar. All are judged on form and dismount. It's important for gymnasts to keep their bodies straight and their toes pointed during routines and to stick the landings." "Sticking the landing means landing on both feet together without taking any extra steps. Any steps or partial steps incur deductions." "Sticking the landing is very important in the scoring of a still rings routine. Dismounts usually involve some sort of back flip or full-body twist, and landing on both feet together without taking an extra step is particularly difficult. Scoring deductions are given for bad form, ring movement, falls, useless swings, bad dismounts or landings, and timing errors." "Body position is maintained while "popping" the vaulting platform. The gymnast completes multiple twists and somersaults in the air before landing on the far side of the vault. The difficulty of the flips, the strength exhibited, and the ability to stick the landing affect scoring." "Dismount is just a fancy way of saying getting off the equipment. However, the style and difficulty of the flipping, twisting, or body motion the gymnast completes in midair (as well as that sticky landing) affect the start value and deductions awarded." http://www.dummies.c...r-olympics.html coachesinfo.com - article seems to date from 2010 (most recent citation) "Strategy adjustments accommodating inherent physical profiles were found to be essential in ensuring effective load attenuation but were acknowledged as potentially incompatible with current constraints in gymnastic scoring systems." http://www.coachesin...ding&Itemid=295 OK, I know all sports requiring extreme physical performance by top athletes at the highest level have the potential to cause injury - maybe serious long term injuries. But the rules for getting high scores in gymnastics seem to require the gymnasts to land with their legs together and more or less straight. If I wanted to formulate a rule to cause maximum damage to a super fit athlete ... that's the rule and scoring framework I would introduce. And it doesn't give me pleasure to see top athletes providing an "entertainment" that seems designed to cause them physical injury. But what do you think?

Hmmm, I'm curious how this is gonna turn out. Especially as Tanner/Casper's still talking in the present tense about "whichever school I decide to go to”. The admissions process will be interesting ....

Yikes I'm later than late! Hope you had a great day, Bob, and here's to many more happy returns of the day

Heheheh, if you really hated 'em you wouldn't watch all the vids to confirm just how much you hate 'em

Accessorize The Queen was accessorized last weekend in The Daily Telegraph! How dare they!! Off with their heads!!!

Dove, Robin Lee Graham?

82??? He's just a whippersnapper! Allan Stewart got his law degree at 91, and has just got his fourth degree at 97 Heheheh I guess you CAN teach old dogs new tricks http://www.abc.net.a.../04/3495516.htm

A literary giant - he must have influenced many writers e.g. Stephen King. He didn't only write sci-fi, but fantasy, horror, mystery, essays ... in fact he claimed he'd only written one sci-fi novel, 451. For Trekkies - Harlan Ellison's script was significantly rewritten by others to the point where he almost wanted to wash his hands of it. But it is a great episode. Just a pity that the central historical premise on which the whole time travel plot hinges doesn't work.

Thanks for that. I have difficulty getting my head around the terminology. A light bulb will go off and I'll think "Yep, I've got it", then sometime later I'll get lost in the labels. Doesn't help when "Gender verification in sports" is discussed and the whole issue of "sex testing", hormones and female XY chromosomes is raised. That's when I find the grasp I thought I had has completely slipped away http://en.wikipedia....ation_in_sports

You are an evil, callous and cruel author, KC. My worst fears in the last chapter review have come true! Killing off a loved character is an act of premeditated malevolence and downright wickedness. And what a horrible death, in such pain and all alone Utter evil Or is this the lead in to a new hybrid Zombie-Ghost Tanner?? Shuffling and moaning horribly in the night while the evil-bitch-cow cowers in her bedroom, fearing the darkness closing around her. I can just picture the scene, the bitch-cow screaming for mercy as she's spooked and haunted, then finally captured and pinned by the decomposing Tanner, staring helplessly into his pitiless eyes, dead eyes, as he munches on her twitching braaiiin, eying up the next juicy bite-sized chunk ... P.S.Thanks for adding your Mom's journal entry KC. Guess she didn't manage to talk you round.

Fair point, but Bernard Manning was a notoriously offensive and racist "comedian" in Britain. He exemplified attitudes that were pretty common in 1950s and 1960s Britain but, fortunately, British attitudes have changed over the years. I can provide examples if you want, but he was a pretty nasty piece of work and many people, if they're honest, can name a few people that they will be happy about when they shuffle off their mortal coils ...

Good point Bill. Let's just run with that using an example: "Jewish" and "joke" almost belong together. And there are countless rib-burstingly funny Jewish jokes. But here's the thing - they're all (in Britain anyway) told by Jewish comedians. You won't find a mainstream non-Jewish comedian telling Jewish jokes. It seems to be "accepted" that this would be in "bad taste". And it's the same with "black" jokes - now Bernard Manning is dead *praise be!* you won't find mainstream white comedians telling "black" jokes (I'm sure this does still go on in fringe / private / racist venues). So, yes, different groups enjoy laughing at themselves - and it's important that they can do this - but maybe they only laugh when it is one of their "own" who is poking fun? But what does everyone else think? Edit to add: just on the "mentally ill" I, personally, can't think of any joke that would be funny or appropriate.

marycielo's thread Favorite GAY character on TV of all Time! has set me thinking. Black "characters" used to be a comedy staple in Britain, because they were "black" - but you won't find them now. Gay "characters" are still a comedy staple on British radio and TV, because they are "gay" (going back to the 1960s, maybe earlier). Is this wrong? Is it appropriate? Are gay "characters" even funny in 2012 just because they are "gay"? *crosses fingers and hopes this will be a tolerant exchange of views and not have to be kicked into Soapbox *

"Interesting" and "fun"? Yikes! Queer as Folk (original UK 1999). Favourite character was Vince Tyler (Craig Kelly), and most memorable hottie was Nathan Maloney (Charlie Hunnam) Edit to add Ooops, I clean forgot the evil Thomas in Downton Abbey - currently my fave evil gay guy Now available as a paper doll cutout "evil playset"

A lot of people are rooting for you

Thought you were a nice guy KC. You know, all cuddly and lovable. Then I get back after a few days away - all unsuspecting - and read THIS!! And now you're planning to leave us dangling for 8 days, as Wayne says, not knowing if "sending Tanner sprawling to the cold hard ground" just means he's been hurt a bit, or maybe he's been permanently injured, or his head's been cracked open by the evil psycho-bitch-cow and he's now lying unconscious in a pool of blood as life slowly ebbs from his shattered body Your pleas for mercy are pitiful. That was deliberate, malicious and just plain bad, bad bad KC

Don't think you will because the Earth will still be around whatever we do. The question is whether the conditions on Earth necessary to support human life will continue, i.e. will the Earth remain a "Goldilocks Planet"? (which it has not been for most of its life according to the the geological record). If not then that would be the end of human life on Earth as we know it today, or maybe altogether. But the Earth would continue just fine without us. And it's a dynamic planet so maybe it would once again become a Goldilocks Planet for another species to enjoy

Body parts you say ...

Yeah, Google's not completely evil

The UK started with "Idol" but switched to X-Factor some years ago. X-Factor was tried in the US this year but didn't do as well as expected. However, the format does offer more variety: girls v boys v groups v old-farts (heheheh) PLUS team competition between the competing judges and their teams. Lots of scope for bitchy back-biting So, if American Idol is fading out, is the US version of X-Factor likely to replace Idol as happened in the UK?

Happy 78th birthday Dr Robert Moog! Well it would be if he wasn't dead Robert Moog gave his name to the Moog synthesizer, launched in 1964. Moog did not invent the synthesizer but, inspired by the Theremin (invented in the 1920s), his instrument was the first to be a practical instrument for musicians by allowing it to be played (controlled) by a piano-type keyboard. The Moog synth, and the later MiniMoog, went on to become the first widely used electronic instruments and led the way for other instrument manufacturers. Whether you like synthesized sound or not, there's no denying its impact across all types of music since the 1960s. Here's one of the earliest uses of the Moog synth in mainstream pop from 1967, Reflections by Diana Ross and the Supremes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgXAtaHIjoE and from 1974 Autobahn by electronic pop pioneers Kraftwerk (remix):

Aww c'mon Y_B don't be a spoilsport. And besides, what's not questionable about a single guy in a tight-fitting rubber suit hanging out all the time with a young male companion?