GLEN AVALON
LOG IN SEARCH POST NEW MESSAGE HEADLINES MIMI !! DIVERSIONS MEDITATIONS BIORHYTHMS
 


  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Back To Board  

2001 was the weirdest year ever

January 13 2002 at 4:09 PM
Webel Fetzer 

How bizarre: 2001 was the weirdest year ever

Robin McKie, science editor
Sunday January 13, 2002
The Observer

First a giant stick insect, previously unknown to science and described as 'a walking sausage', was discovered on a remote Pacific island. Then the Beast of Cricklewood was captured and revealed to be a lynx on the loose in north London. And, finally, in southern Italy, it kept raining frogs.

It was, in short, a very odd year. Indeed, according to the Fortean Times, 2001 was a total record-breaker for nuttiness. Its Weirdness Index, which FT compiles every year, shot off the scale.

Suicides, epidemics and disasters all increased. Cults were more active, particularly in the wake of the 11 September attacks, while the British weather simply went haywire. Last summer was the wettest on record while October was the hottest.

In addition, a completely new species of giant shark was photographed in the Pacific, off Colombia; crocodiles were spotted in New York, Vienna and Sweden; and a coelacanth, a fish once thought to have been extinct for millions of years, was caught off the Kenyan coast.

There were, however, fewer sightings of that ultimate alien artefact, the crop circle - though those observed were bigger and more complex than in previous years. 'We certainly don't think aliens constructed them,' said Bob Rickard, FT 's founder. 'It looks as though gangs of crop-circle "artists" are now competing with each other to make new and ever more sophisticated circles.'

It was also a bumper year for frog-falls in Italy. 'Some say these frogs were probably dropped by birds of prey, but in every case, the frogs were all of the same species and age,' said Rickard. 'Synchronised vomiting by herons is a very unlikely explanation.

'Weirdness is humanity's way of overcoming the ever-increasing pressure to live nine-to-five lives. We need craziness, it's that simple.'


 

 Respond to this message   
Current Topic - 2001 was the weirdest year ever
  << Previous Topic | Next Topic >>Back To Board  
Create your own forum at Network54
 Copyright © 1999-2010 Network54. All rights reserved.   Terms of Use   Privacy Statement  

DISCLAIMER
Definition:
Skeptic: skeptic in our parlance is someone who examines the subject from all viewpoints with an open mind. Otherwise we do and will call them pseudoskeptics.

Any copyrighted work reproduced on this page is displayed under protection of the Fair Use Doctrine.
If your copyrighted work appears here and you wish it removed, please post a complaint and the work will be removed.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "fair use" doctrine allows limited reproduction of copyrighted works for educational and research purposes. The relevant portion of the copyright statue provides that the "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including reproduction "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is not an infringement of copyright. The law lists the following factors as the ones to be evaluated in determining whether a particular use of a copyrighted work is a permitted "fair use," rather than an infringement of the copyright:
• the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
• the nature of the copyrighted work; • the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
• the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Although all of these factors will be considered, the last factor is the most important in determining whether a particular use is "fair." Where a work is available for purchase or license from the copyright owner in the medium or format desired, copying of all or a significant portion of the work in lieu of purchasing or licensing a sufficient number of "authorized" copies would be presumptively unfair. Where only a small portion of a work is to be copied and the work would not be used if purchase or licensing of a sufficient number of authorized copies were required, the intended use is more likely to be found to be fair.