12/24/2004: Happy polar bear Xmas
 

http://cellar.org/2004/polarbearxmastreat.jpg

Ah, more gingerbread.

Charly, a 1,150 pound polar bear at SeaWorld San Diego's Wild Arctic attraction, gives a few delicate licks to a gingerbread man before devouring the tasty treat Wednesday Dec. 15, 2004. Wild Arctic keepers often leave fruit, cream cheese and other treats for the polar bears. In keeping with the holiday season, the bears are enjoying a number of extravagances, including a live Christmas tree, snowman, gift boxes and stockings made of bread.

More bread art too. Nice. I bet the stockings are a lot cooler looking than the bed.

Cliff Clavin moment of the day: Polar bears do not have white fur--their hair is translucent.

When does the fight start with Sierra ???
"EWWWW!!!!!!!! Mom, Charly's licking MY ginger breadman !!!!!!"

I love how even those whose job it is to educate us about animals and their habits insist on anthropomorphizing them.

I don't know if I spelled that right, and I'm not even going to bother checking. :p

And their skin is black... so why does my eye see white?
..some kind of Jacko effect? :eyebrow:

Reflection of light off the hairs

What's the difference between white fur and translucent hair which reflects white light?

I think that's just splitting hairs.

(You're just jealous you didn't think of it first.)

White fur is just that--white. Translucent is clear (has no color).

It looks like Charly might have had to travel through some of Frank Zappa's yellow snow. :D

But isn't the definition of color light reflectance? And so if the bear looks white because its fur reflects white light, how is the fur not white?

Check this out:
http://www.polarbearsinternational.org/facts3.php

Scroll down to "Polar Bear Fur". ;)

Oboy... I think I started an avalanche about this poor bears color-physics.
Ok,ok.. I already knew how it work. Can we all start eat those gingerthings
now. :yum:

btw Merry Christmas :D

That's not a polar bear - it's a Cartesian bear after a coordinate transform :)

The same way snow is not white I would imagine.

I'm surprised they didn't put a few glass bottles of Coke out there for them....

This bear from a Chinese Zoo looks a little yellow......and hungry for fish. :)

That is one raggedy-ass, and thin polar bear. He needs more than just that one fish!

The Chinese tend to be thin with thick hair. ;)

What's the difference between a polar bear and a transformed cartesian bear?

Don't know but it got the Cellar #1 on Google under cartesian bear. :biggrin:

That bear definitely does not look well. And that guy holding up the fish should hand it over already to the poor fellow.

I believe that's a joke about some sort of mathematical or physics theory, no? Nobody gets it, dude.

THREADJACK
You might be right, Garnet. :eek:

HA! I told ya so! Mushrooms are indeed the nastiest, most evil thing on the planet. They are the anti-Christ of the plant world, and nobody believed me. Finally....PROOF! :rollanim:

Not true. I thought it was very funny.

I thought it was hilarious. It seems that it is just you.

Don't touch that! That's evil!

Let me know if you need an exorcism, my dear.

Just your frame of reference

OK - I'll stop with the math puns now

Not a theory - just math - any time you plot something on a grid, it can be refered to in 2 ways...

X and Y - which is what most people thing of - That's called "Cartesian coordinates"

OR

an angle, and the distance from 0 - called a Polar Coordinates

Now you can fairly easily convert from one to the other, and converting from one to the other is called a "Transform" - hence you can convert Polar to Cartesian, or Cartesian to Polar any time you want - same thing, different way of talking about it

Call it a high brow math joke

I thought it was funny. :lol:

I'm still laughing at the evil mushrooms!

Really? From some of the other replies in the thread it appears that others didn't get either, and you would therefore be exaggerating, wouldn't you? Oooops, I forgot, wolf knows everthing. Silly me.:rolleyes:

I believe that's a joke about some sort of mathematical or physics theory, no? Nobody gets it, dude.

Garnet, your spats with wolf aside, this is why you end up in so many flamewars with various people on this board. Maybe you don't realize it, but that comment comes off as rather rude and dismissive. If you were speaking the sentence in real life, perhaps you would somehow use your tone to make it clear that you were teasing (if indeed you were,) but when typed out, with no emoticons to help express what you mean, you look as if you just lashed out in a condescending manner towards someone who merely made a joke.

AND, she's a big scary lesbian.

don;t forget the lesbian cracks, clod.

How did I know I would hear from you next? Hmmm, probably because you take every chance you get to attack my posts--not surprising.

I did not intend to insult the individual who made that joke, and I apologize if I did. He, however, did not seem to be insulted by it, did he? He politely explained the joke, which I appreciate, and did not seem to be offended whatsoever. And I thought the use of the slang term "dude" in post may have hinted that I ws just joking around, but apparently people like you, wolf, and dar512 are hell-bent on insisting that I'm insulting people. Why don't you get off my ass? You go out of your way to rip on me, just as you've done practically since day one (and the same is true of wolf). I ignore your posts because I don't like you. Perhaps you can show me the same courtesy. Thank you.

how can you not like clodfobble? she's adorable......oh, i know. she's too obviously hetero. and maybe a little brainy.....but still adorable

ps....yes, it's rainy out, jinx is still asleep, and i feel the urge to stir the poop.

yay me!

I love ya, LJ--you know that. I'll take your insults any day...at least they're funny! :joylove:

Now THAT is a flame-fest. Ouch!!!!

Don't either of you have anything worse to say about each other? Don't you see how the guys get it done? Where are the insults about each other's family, sexual ability, appearance, etc.? Where are the offers to get together in real life and kick each other's ass?

damn. i guess you broke the code. oh well, i guess i'll go clean out shelby's pigstie of a jeep. ho hum.

Garnet, I think what you fail to understand is that I don't bust on every single post you make. I don't have the time, or the energy. The comment was funny, and, I thought, appropriately weighted to your concept about not getting the joke.

If you can't take one, don't make one.

There is an effect in psychology where you remember when things meet your pattern, and dismiss or forget things when they don't ... such as the number of times you see your "lucky number", which appears with the same frequency as the other ones, or having a premonition of disaster and having it come true.

An amazing number of psychics have released their prediction of the Indian Ocean Tsunami ... afterthe wave hit.

They don't crow so loudly about their misses.

Heh heh. I think that's LumberJim's territory :p

I'm aware of that wolf, and I never said you did. You only attack me when the mood suits you, which, in my opinion, is far too frequently, and for no reason other than because you feel like it.

I disagree that your comment was "appropriately weighted." In all your posts you choose your words carefully, and I respect that about you. I, unfortunately, am not quite as careful sometimes, and I admit it. It seems to me, however, that your words in that post were specifically chosen to make Garnet look stupid. Maybe you didn't intend it that way, but that's how I read it. If that wasn't your intent, perhaps you should follow Clodfobble's all-knowing words of wisdom and use the smilies.

One of my wives used to do that all the time. Anything going on always drew dire predictions from her. If nothing came of it...silence, but if she was right...we'd never hear the end of it. :rolleyes:

:flamer: :corn:


I still don't get the joke.... :(

Does this help?:3eye:

Uh...oh yeh. It's much clearer now... :yelsick:

I didn't think you were being mean. But it was incorrect to make the statement that no one got it. I thought it was a good joke and didn't want the original poster to be discouraged from making math jokes.

Garnet, you can check through all my posts. I do not go out of my way to be mean. I seldom debate on this board and when I do I try very hard to argue on the merits of the issues and not personalities.

The following is a quote I'm familiar with and thought it would make a good retort to your post. I decided not to add it, since I thought it might hurt your feelings. However, since I've been hit with the brush anyway, I'll give you this:

Really? Hmmmm.....

Wow, at the bottom of that link it says "Make money from yo". A lot of people in Philly could get rich. :hafucking

uh oh ok then

Yes. You were being mean. I called you on it.

And you were being dishonest saying that you only respond to the issues and don't personally attack people. You asked me to search your previous posts--so I did.

Do you stalk ex-boyfriends?

No, do you?

Oh wait, that wasn't a serious question, was it? It was an attempt by wolf to insult and/or make fun of Garnet. How surprising that wolf would do something like that. Shocking!

You're becoming quite predictable, dear. :zzz:

lumberjim notices that this is the second time in this thread that garnet has referred to herself in the third person. And he thinks it's kind of pretentious. but at the same time, he is just being cute, and is in no way singling out the aforementioned garnet and 'picking on her'

Why is referring to ones self in the third person, pretentious? :confused:

LUMBERJIM: The perfect literary brawl coach.
My hat's off to you. :thumbsup:

I'm not so sure it's pretentious, but since LJ is being cute again maybe we'll let this one slide. ;)