Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2011 June 11

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

June 11

support vehicle

I saw a picture of the US Airways Flight 1549 support vehicle. It looks nice. But I was wondering what the brand was. Anyone know?24.90.204.234 (talk) 02:19, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

From the picture in the article, I'd say it's either a Chevy Suburban or Tahoe. Dismas|^(talk) 02:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

What's the difference between the two?24.90.204.234 (talk) 03:22, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Check the articles but my cursory check indicates that the Suburban is the long wheelbase version of the Tahoe. Exxolon (talk) 11:43, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

When will this case be heard?

I suppose there are too many variables to make a guess? [1] 66.108.223.179 (talk) 02:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Such lawsuits rarely go to "trial" in a traditional sense. What usually happens in these cases is that one group or the other gains favor with either lawmakers OR with the regulatory agency in question (in this case the FDA it would appear) and either law or regulation ends up changing to favor one side or the other. --Jayron32 03:27, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, it was filed in federal court, and specifically in the United States District Court for the Central District of California, in Los Angeles. In the federal courts there is a crisis with judicial vacancies; the Senate takes much longer than has been traditionally standard to confirm the President's judicial nominees, and the result is that as seats become vacant and judges go on senior status, it takes correspondingly longer for cases to proceed in court, although magistrate judges take up some of the load. So you can count on a long-term backlog in the federal district courts, and probably in this particular California federal district.

As to when it will actually proceed to trial - it might not. There might be a settlement, or the FDA might issue some rule that makes the suit moot. Even if the suit does proceed, there will be pretrial motions to take up (such as a motion to dismiss and motions on venue and jurisdiction), continuances, and so forth. So count on it being many months at the very least. Neutrality^talk 05:54, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Marriage alliances with Portugal

Was Portugal a very undesirable country to marry with or marry into in the age when royal marriages were used as diplomacy? I mean from my observation Portugal has seen the most spinster and bachelor infantas and infantes in any of the royal families of Europe.--Queen Elizabeth II's Little Spy (talk) 06:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

This is by no means my area of expertise, but it occurs to me that for most of its history after the Iberian Union, Portugal was virtually a protectorate of Protestant Britain. As such, it may have had little to offer diplomatically to prospective spouses. Marco polo (talk) 22:41, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, there was Catherine of Braganza... The Mark of the Beast (talk) 03:50, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The Little Spy starts with an unclear statement "from my observation Portugal has seen the most spinster and bachelor infantas and infantes in any of the royal families of Europe". It may be better to look at Category:Portuguese infantas and Category:Portuguese infantes and to check them one by one. Afterwards one would need to compare the number of spinsters and bachelors of the other royal families of Europe. Only then are we able to pass a wiser judgement. Flamarande (talk) 02:47, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Robert Kiyosaki

Approximately how rich was Robert Kiyosaki before he sold a single book about how to get rich? 76.27.175.80 (talk) 13:04, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

(for reference) we have a Robert Kiyosaki article. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 13:08, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Somalis in Canada

How did Canada receive Somali immigrants in the first despite Canada doesn't have an embassy in that country? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.53.228.20 (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

As far as I know, there is no visit required to a local embassy to immigrate to Canada. Looking at the website for the Department of Citizenship and Immigration Canada, it seems you fill out forms and mail them. ^Avic_ennasis @ 16:27, 9 Sivan 5771 / 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Note that if a country recognises the other country, they will usually have an embassy which covers that country although it may be located in another country. In this particular case, the High Commission of Canada to Kenya covers Somalia [2] although they have no formal diplomatic relations with the Transitional Federal Government (but do have a working relationship) and given the security situation they cannot provide consular assistance to Canadians in Somalia [3].

Also note that even if a country has an embassy in another country, it doesn't mean that embassy processes immigration requests or visas. New Zealand has a High Commission in Kuala Lumpur [4], the Singapore branch of New Zealand immigrant handles visas [5]. (Passports for New Zealand citizens are still dealt with by the HC in Malaysia.) While these can sometimes be handled by post, Malaysia forbids you to send your passport by post so many may not wish to do so in the unlikely event it's lost. (Although some Malaysian high commissions and embassies will send your new passport to you if you take full responsibility rather then require you to visit in person.) Nil Einne (talk) 11:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Most Somalis in Canada have come as refugees. The process for admission is quite different than for independent immigrants. Cases are usually refered to Canadian authorities by the UNHCR and are often interviewed either in refugee camps or in some other third country location. Before the disintegration of Somalia, immigration, would proceed through a nearby Canadian Embassy or High Commission, as is the case for other countries that do not have a resident Embassy; I doubt that there have been many "regular" immigrants since anarchy took hold in the early 1990s, though. --Xuxl (talk) 15:38, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Looking for b/w photo

Reposting after suggestion from entertainment desk. I'm looking for a photo I saw once in a book. It was black and white and featured a woman wearing a wedding dress standing in a forest beside a big oak (or similar) tree. I think the name of the photo was something similar to "beauty and the beast in the dark woods". I'm sure it was a famous photographer, potentially a nz photographer - I saw it in a book in a school photography class. Not much to go on, but I'd appreciate if anyone has any ideas. Thanks! Aaadddaaammm (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Photos of non-'rectangular'-star-pattern United States Flags?

The wikipedia page on the History of the Flag of the United States shows many unusual patterns for the stars. Are there any photos of some of these variants in use? How common were they? --CGPGrey (talk) 16:25, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, there is this pic: [6], from the article. It's not a pic of the flags themselves, but rather of an oil painting containing the flags. However, if you edit that pic to make a dozen individual pics of the non-rectangular flags, they should look pretty good. I suspect that many of the original flags, if they still exists, are in poor shape and therefore make for ugly pics. StuRat (talk) 18:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Countries offering citizenship for anyone

I've been wondering (out of interest!) whether there are any countries which offer citizenship with very limited or no requirements, ie. could anyone apply for it even if they have no ties with the country? ╟─TreasuryTag►sheriff─╢ 20:11, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Not citizenship, but visa-free residence: there is no visa requirement to live on Svalbard (ref). Although this itself not a route to Norwegian citizenship, it seems that the time one spends living on Svalbard does count toward the time requirements for permanent residency in Norway (and later citizenship).(ref). The realities of Svalbardian life, however, seem to mean that few people avail themselves of this. -- Finlay McWalter ☻ Talk 20:33, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Have a link, on me: Svalbard. StuRat (talk) 20:38, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

If you're Jewish (or wanna convert) you can easily gain citizenship in Israel under the Law of Return. Also, you can join the French Foreign Legion and apply for French citizenship after 3 years of service. And if you're wealthy, a few countries offer "citizenship-by-investment", such as Austria, Cyprus, Dominica and St. Kitts & Nevis. ^Avic_ennasis @ 21:21, 9 Sivan 5771 / 11 June 2011 (UTC)

One that surprises me in not letting just about anybody in is Canada. They have an extremely low population density, even if you discount the portion which is Arctic tundra. You'd think, under those conditions, they would be more welcoming of immigrants than they are. StuRat (talk) 22:09, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure, there is probably room for some more people (although not too many - even in the south of the country, the growing season is very short, limiting the amount of food they can grow) but what would they gain by letting anyone in? They do have an immigration policy that is more open than many - see Immigration to Canada - but you have to bring something worthwhile to the country. If you have a useful skill or you plan to start your own business, then they'll probably let you in. If you are just going to get a job that a Canadian could easily have done or, worse, live on benefits, then why should they let you in? --Tango (talk) 22:36, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

All things being equal, the larger the population, the larger the economy, which in turn increases that nation's power and influence. And the argument that they will take a job from a Canadian isn't true, as more people create more jobs. After all, they will need more waiters to serve them food, more teachers to teach their kids, more auto mechanics to rip them off when their cars break down, etc. StuRat (talk) 23:37, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

That seems to me a bit over-simplistic to me. The taxes they might take from that waitresses' $7/hour job, for example, isn't going to add up to the cost of feeding, housing, and medicating me. (Plus, I could not have kids, ride my bike everywhere, and grow my own food in my garden.) ^Avic_ennasis @ 00:48, 10 Sivan 5771 / 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Indeed. I don't know about Canada, but in the UK only the richest 40% of the population make a net contribution to the Treasury. The other 60% receive more in benefits, education, healthcare, etc. than they pay in taxes.[7] If an immigrant is going to enter that 40%, then the quality of living of everyone already in the country will be probably increase on average. If they enter the 60%, then it may well decrease. I would expect Canada to be much the same as the UK in that respect. --Tango (talk) 13:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think your source supports your claim. It only talks about income and ignores the effect of indirect taxes (except in stating that taking them into account, overall taxes are close to linear). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 20:12, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Increasing the population would certainly increase the size of the economy, as most of the money spent on the new arrivals would presumably stay in Canada, too. Add to this any new wealth they create or bring with them. It is, however, possible that the new arrivals could bring the GDP per person down, if they make less than current citizens. StuRat (talk) 00:53, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Why would China have a One-child policy if increasing the population also grows the economy? ^Avic_ennasis @ 02:34, 10 Sivan 5771 / 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Unlike Canada, their nation is overpopulated, leading to a whole range of environmental, economic, and social problems. And newborns don't grow the economy as quickly as adult immigrants, since they don't work for many years. Also, back then China was far poorer on a per capita basis, so didn't have the money to invest in that many children, as far as education, etc. StuRat (talk) 06:41, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Ah. So it's more complicated than I thought. :-) Thanks. ^Avic_ennasis @ 06:44, 10 Sivan 5771 / 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Besides which, in 1978 wasn't China still primarily Communistic? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:13, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes. StuRat (talk) 19:31, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

While Canadian politicians might gain more prestige from a nation having the "power and influence" of a large economy, the voters who elect them are probably more concerned with per-capita measures of wealth so it doesn't necessarily follow that it would be desirable. I'm sure most people would rather be rich in unimportant Liechtenstein than poor in powerful China. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.214.166.169 (talk) 09:42, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

But, even in that case, they should still let in anyone whose income, wealth, and skills are above those of the average Canadian, but they don't. StuRat (talk) 19:29, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

"Reading" people

Good morning neighbours. A frequent problem I have is I have trouble picking out or interpretting non-intentional physical cues, including subtle body language but also those in appearance (for example, a ruffled shirt, unwashed hair, and more subtle that this), that is, I may not think to take notice, or if I do I can't tell what it means. It might be called forensic body reading, I'm not sure. I'm not looking to become House, but it seems that this is a rather useful skill to have that I would like to cultivate. Can anyone recommend any literature written on this topic? thank you. (PS: Oddly enough, friends who are naturally or by profession good at this sort of thing say they rarely can get anything from me, or if they can it is not accurate. weird :) 72.128.95.0 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:39, 11 June 2011 (UTC).

There are no such signs, it is bunkum like astrology. 92.24.181.38 (talk) 23:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. So-called "psychics" doing cold readings use such techniques, as do even less reputable people, like salesmen. :-) StuRat (talk) 23:31, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Here is how you cultivate it. Get to know someone very well, spend hours a day with them, and you will be able to read many of their cues and tell what they are thinking (you will also act a lot like them and they will act like you which helps). It's not psychic or anything, you just get to know someone well. So what you want to do is get to know people much better. Your friends probably don't know you well enough, and your "professional" ones. Well, I'll just be frank. Psychics are full of it. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | Say Shalom! 23:32, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Note: this question comes from an IP who abuses the reference desks with frivolous questions on a daily basis. Looie496 (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

There are loads of books on the subject. Whether any of them say anything useful, I don't know. See neuro-linguistic programming for one attempt at a rigorous treatment of the subject. I suspect the best way to learn such skills is just by practising, though. Try people watching and try and guess things about the strangers you see. You won't be able to find out if you are right in most cases, but it will get you thinking about such signs. --Tango (talk) 00:05, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

NLP is just pseudoscience, like astrology. The "Criticism and controversy" section makes up the bulk of the Wikipedia article. 92.24.176.63 (talk) 14:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

...You could just watch a Lie To Me marathon... ^Avic_ennasis @ 00:20, 10 Sivan 5771 / 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Trolls sometimes ask very useful questions. What has been asked here is a subject I studied at degree level, and the ability to "read" people is a distinguishing trait for people with Aspergers syndrome or autistic spectrum disorders. The topic as a whole is called Non-verbal communication. I suggest reading "The Psychology of Interpersonal Behaviour" by Michael Argyle, or "Manwatching" by Desmond Morris, for starters. --TammyMoet (talk) 07:35, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I think the OP was asking about what in poker are called "tells", like people supposedly wriggling their foot or scratching their nose when they are lying. I believe they have been debunked by recent reasearch. I've read Argyles TPOIB, and it covers a much greater range than merely "tells". I don't think it mentions thjem at all, or if so only very briefly, but it is a long time since I read it. 2.101.1.42 (talk) 11:18, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

People definitely have tells. The standard theories you hear ("If you look and to the left, you are lying. If you look up and the to the right, you are telling the truth." or possibly the other way round) are almost certainly nonsense, but individuals do have tells you can spot. They are different for different people, but they exist. --Tango (talk) 13:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Not true. As I wrote, they have been debunked by recentish research. If you similarly want to believe in astrology, then you will find lots of support from popular newspapers, other believers, and charalatans. 92.24.176.63 (talk) 13:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

People definitely have "body language", and those who know how to recognize it can exploit it. If you think there's no such thing as body language, where do you think the term "poker face" comes from? That's someone who is in control of his body language, or at least is self-aware enough to not let it betray him. And how often have you seen someone fold their arms across their chests when they're feeling vulnerable? Are you going to believe uncited "research", or your own eyes? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:09, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I suggest you read the psuedoscience article. You could make similar claims for astrology or lucky charms etc. 92.24.176.63 (talk) 14:23, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I wonder how the Professor Emeritus of Oxford Brookes University would feel about being called a pseudo-scientist? --TammyMoet (talk) 18:06, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

If there is, as you imply, a "professor emeritus" of that place keen on NLP, then it just drops my opinion of it even more. The pseudo-fad used to be semiology, now apparantly its "nlp". 92.24.134.162 (talk) 19:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The late Professor Michael Argyle, to whom I refer, specialised in Non-Verbal Communication, called in some places Interpersonal Psychology. I don't know why you feel the need to bring Neuro-Linguistic Programming into this discussion as it seems to have no relevance. I think you're trolling now. --TammyMoet (talk) 20:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

I can't imagine why 92.24 is comparing non-verbal communication with astrology - that's not even apples and oranges, more like apples and orangutans. NVC is about observing what people actually do - with their eyes, their face, their arms, their stance, their posture, and the non-verbal parts of the noises they make with their throat - and finding some meaning in it, because there most assuredly is meaning there to be found. There's an old saying, "Actions speak louder than words", which remains true. If there's ever a mismatch between what a person is saying and what their body is doing, e.g. saying "Yes, I agree" but simultaneously shaking their head as if to indicate "No, I disagree", the body language will always be the true indicator of what they're communicating. 92.24 would do well to read up on the life, work and legacy of Milton H. Erickson before they do any more trashing of well-accepted and widely-used studies of human behaviour, based on their ignorance (assumption of good faith leads to that conclusion). -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 20:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

"Neuro-linguistic programming" is psuedo-science, and poker "tells" do not exist. I've never said that the study of non-verbal communication in general is that. Do not confuse the two. (Astrology, not astronomy! Even though they both study stars and planets. Also note that science-fiction and scientology are not proper sub-parts of science, and criticism of the former does not mean that I am criticising the latter). "nlp" was raised by Tango above, and that was what people have apparantly been discussing, although now TammyMoet has suddenly said it isnt. I have not been commenting on non-verbal communication, but only on "nlp" and "tells" which was as far as I could see the subject of this sub-thread. 92.24.183.103 (talk) 10:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

How do you know that? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:42, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Please be more specific about what "that" refers to in your question. 92.24.183.103 (talk) 13:53, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

I know very well the difference between astrology and astronomy. Hence my bolding of "actually do", because astronomy is at least a study of what actually is, whereas the astrology you introduced into the conversation is ... well, not that. So please don't lecture me on confusion. Now, about NLP being "psuedo[sic]-science" - where are your citations for that assertion? -- Jack of Oz ^{[your turn]} 21:26, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

First I'll need to read the article about pseudo-spelling. Body language can be observed and exploited - and often is. Astrology is bogus. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 14:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Would you like to provide a reference for that? I play poker and I can tell you that people definitely have tells. For example, someone might have a habit of talking more when bluffing. If you notice that, you can take advantage of it and win all their chips. --Tango (talk) 20:29, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The IP seems to be conflating unrelated phenomena. NLP is certainly pseudoscience, but it has to do with influencing someones actions; poker tells, cold reading and body language are deducing someone's intentions by observation. As was said earlier, apples and orangutans. — The Hand That Feeds You:^Bite 17:19, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

The best example of a people-reader was sherlock Holmes.

In "A Scandal in Bohemia" Holmes deduces that Watson had got very wet lately and that he had "a most clumsy and careless servant girl." When Watson, in amazement, asks how Holmes knows this, Holmes answers:

It is simplicity itself ... My eyes tell me that on the inside of your left shoe, just where the firelight strikes it, the leather is scored by six almost parallel cuts. Obviously they have been caused by someone who has very carelessly scraped round the edges of the sole in order to remove crusted mud from it. Hence, you see, my double deduction that you had been out in vile weather, and that you had a particularly malignant boot-slitting specimen of the London slavey.

BrainyBabe (talk) 14:42, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Holmes is a poor model; Watson never says, "Actually, Holmes, I went out after the rain, but there was still plenty of mud." There are always multiple interpretations of Holmes' "deductions" (really inductions, but who's counting?), but because it is fictional, Holmes is usually right. --Mr.98 (talk) 15:46, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Can you always trust what you can see? See http://www.myfacialexpressions.com/.

—Wavelength (talk) 18:36, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

The World Wide Web has a number of online tests of ability to interpret facial expressions. For example, see the fourth test at http://www.testmybrain.org/. See also http://www.cio.com/article/facial-expressions-test.

—Wavelength (talk) 19:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)