WWTBAM Bored

Tami Koel
Omaha, NE
Twirling dance instructor, world class baton twirler.

[Tami was shown twirling flawlessly during the pre-show "standup" intro with Meredith...]

The family baton twirling training business is seeing a drop in business, which might require them to close half of their facility.

Tami lost her brother Bobby in a car accident six years ago, she's wearing her "Bobby bracelet."

Tami has her ATE and DD lifelines.
Today's expert is CNN coanchor Kiran Chetry

Question Topics:
Sigmund Freud
1942
Famous Photos
American Women
Family Ancestry
The Grammys
Science Class
Mythical Creatures
First in Flight
World News
Comedians
Across the Pond
Organizations
Sesame Street
Common Jokes


$10,000 - First in Flight
The site of the Wright Brothers[sic]historic first flight, Kitty Hawk is located in what U.S. state?
A: North Carolina B: Florida
C: Ohio D: New York

With 24 seconds remaining, Tami decides to Ask The Expert.

ATE discussion

Kiran is pretty sure that the answer is North Carolina. Her surety is based on her knowledge that NC license plates include the motto "first in flight."

Tami decides to answer

Spoiler

A

Spoiler

A: North Carolina (20)

$12,500 - Mythical Creatures
A mythical creature blamed for killing livestock in Mexico, El Chupacabara literally means what in Spanish?
A: Fox crusher B: Cow snatcher
C: Horse eater D: Goat sucker

With 19 seconds remaining, Tami decides to Double Dip.

Her first answer is

Spoiler

D

, and is correct.

Spoiler

D: Goat sucker (19)

$15,000 - Science Class
Light is created in fluorescent lamp when an electric current reacts with an inert gas and what?
A: Mercury B: Silicon
C: Carbon D: Uranium

Tami is really not sure, and she decides to walk away with $12,500.

Spoiler

A: Mercury ()

BBTranscriptTeam wrote: $15,000 - Science Class
Light is created in fluorescent lamp when an electric current reacts with an inert gas and what?

D: Uranium

Somehow, I don't think we'd see quite as many people urging us to use fluorescent lighting if this were the case.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BBTranscriptTeam wrote: $15,000 - Science Class
Light is created in fluorescent lamp when an electric current reacts with an inert gas and what?

D: Uranium

Somehow, I don't think we'd see quite as many people urging us to use fluorescent lighting if this were the case.

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

And it wouldn not be the first example of experts 'urging us to use' something dangerous in the name of safety: if you exclude the people who would have been safe if they had been wearing seat belts, it turns out that the number of people killed by air bags exceeds the number of people who have been saved by air bags. Air bags are primarily a 'safety feature' for people too stupid to use a seat belt-- if you use a seat belt, an air bag is more likely to kill you than save you (hence the modifications that let 'small people' disable them, the directions to keep children in the back seats, etc.)

BBTranscriptTeam wrote:[$10,000 - First in Flight
The site of the Wright Brothers[sic]historic first flight, Kitty Hawk is located in what U.S. state?
A: North Carolina B: Florida
C: Ohio D: New York

With 24 seconds remaining, Tami decides to Ask The Expert.

Oh, my!

BBTranscriptTeam wrote:

ATE discussion

Kiran is pretty sure that the answer is North Carolina. Her surety is based on her knowledge that NC license plates include the motto "first in flight."

Tami decides to answer

Spoiler

A

Spoiler

A: North Carolina (20)

Oh, my! Kiran doesn't remember this fact from history, but she does remember her license plates! But even with that memory, she's only "pretty sure".



It's my turn to thank my fellow members of the BBTranscriptTeam. The show was preempted for me, last evening, by an extended ABC World News report on the Haitian earthquake.

silverscreenselect wrote:

BBTranscriptTeam wrote: $15,000 - Science Class
Light is created in fluorescent lamp when an electric current reacts with an inert gas and what?

D: Uranium

Somehow, I don't think we'd see quite as many people urging us to use fluorescent lighting if this were the case.

But think of the electricity we'd save!

wintergreen48 wrote:And it wouldn not be the first example of experts 'urging us to use' something dangerous in the name of safety: if you exclude the people who would have been safe if they had been wearing seat belts, it turns out that the number of people killed by air bags exceeds the number of people who have been saved by air bags. Air bags are primarily a 'safety feature' for people too stupid to use a seat belt-- if you use a seat belt, an air bag is more likely to kill you than save you (hence the modifications that let 'small people' disable them, the directions to keep children in the back seats, etc.)

Please quote a credible source for that.

Side impact air bags keep your head from bouncing off the window or metal. How would a seat belt help?

This short article reports on Tami's appearance and also mentions another Nebraskan, Dan Brown, who enters the Hot Seat on Jan. 21.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100113/LIVING/701139827

Brown is a student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln whose YouTube posting of a Rubik’s Cube tutorial drew millions of views.

There's a hook...

MarleysGh0st wrote:This short article reports on Tami's appearance and also mentions another Nebraskan, Dan Brown, who enters the Hot Seat on Jan. 21.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100113/LIVING/701139827

Brown is a student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln whose YouTube posting of a Rubik’s Cube tutorial drew millions of views.

There's a hook...

Do you think Dan Brown (holdover from famous names, maybe) will be given a cube to solve in the HS?

frogman042 wrote:

MarleysGh0st wrote:This short article reports on Tami's appearance and also mentions another Nebraskan, Dan Brown, who enters the Hot Seat on Jan. 21.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20100113/LIVING/701139827

Brown is a student at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln whose YouTube posting of a Rubik’s Cube tutorial drew millions of views.

There's a hook...

Do you think Dan Brown (holdover from famous names, maybe) will be given a cube to solve in the HS?

Only if he claims he can solve it in ten seconds or something like that.

Bob Juch wrote:

wintergreen48 wrote:And it wouldn not be the first example of experts 'urging us to use' something dangerous in the name of safety: if you exclude the people who would have been safe if they had been wearing seat belts, it turns out that the number of people killed by air bags exceeds the number of people who have been saved by air bags. Air bags are primarily a 'safety feature' for people too stupid to use a seat belt-- if you use a seat belt, an air bag is more likely to kill you than save you (hence the modifications that let 'small people' disable them, the directions to keep children in the back seats, etc.)

Please quote a credible source for that.

Side impact air bags keep your head from bouncing off the window or metal. How would a seat belt help?

Well, a good three-point seat belt, properly fastened, should keep you from moving side-to-side, which should prevent you from bouncing off the window or metal part of the car (do cars actually have interior metal anymore? but of course hard plastic can hurt as much as sheet metal)

To be honest, I was not even thinking about side-impact bags: I was talking about the front-impact air bags, which were the ones mandated, which do cause some injuries but generally do not do more for you than a good seat belt will do for you, and were the subject of a lot of NHSA reviews in the early years (the bags were mandated in 1998, studies were issue around 2000). I do not have the study in front of me now-- this is several years back, but the initial numbers that were coming out after the first few years of mandatory air bag installations showed a lot of people-- several thousand-- whose lives were saved by the bags, but the vast majority of them were people who would have survived if they were wearing seatbelts, which is the basis for my comment that air bags save people who are too stupid to wear seatbelts; if you remove those people from the list, limiting it only to those whose lives were saved BECAUSE they had an air bag and who would NOT have survived with just seat belts, the positive results were down to single digits. But a greater number of people than this (not a huge number, but more than the number 'saved') were actually killed by air bags, and other people seriously injured (arm and facial fractures mostly). The people who were injured or killed were generally 'small stature' people (infants, children, petite women, etc.), and that study is the one that led to the recommedations about putting children (who are generally 'small stature') in the back seat rather than in the front seat of the car (so they would not be hit by the air bags at all), and allowing for people to disable the air bags (when the driver is a 'small stature' person).

It's been a while since I read that study, but I do not think that it mentioned side impact air bags, which may not have been in common use at that time; in any event, I don't think that, even today, they are actually required, are they? Dual front airbags have been required since (I think) 1998, but I don't think that thare is a requirement for side impact bags (which have their own issues-- if the passenger is leaning against the window or door when it deploys, it apparently can cause very severe injury).

wintergreen48 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

BBTranscriptTeam wrote: $15,000 - Science Class
Light is created in fluorescent lamp when an electric current reacts with an inert gas and what?

D: Uranium

Somehow, I don't think we'd see quite as many people urging us to use fluorescent lighting if this were the case.

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

Here's what Snopes has to say about the levels of mercury in a light bulb and the danger involved.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

It's hard to say, based on the EPA recommended procedures, just how big a risk breaking a single light bulb would be (obviously, landfills, where many, many bulbs could be disposed, are a different matter). The EPA recommendations might just be typical err-on-the-side-of-caution overkill. Plus, fluorescent bulbs have been in people's homes and businesses for many years without major reports of death or illness (or lawsuits against manufacturers).

I'd bet almost anything that the overwhelming majority of people who break a fluorescent bulb dispose of it the same way they do any other bulb, and that a lot of them vacuum up the glass shards. Plus, I doubt people will evacuate and ventilate the room and turn off central heat or air conditioning either.

silverscreenselect wrote:

wintergreen48 wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:
Somehow, I don't think we'd see quite as many people urging us to use fluorescent lighting if this were the case.

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

Here's what Snopes has to say about the levels of mercury in a light bulb and the danger involved.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

It's hard to say, based on the EPA recommended procedures, just how big a risk breaking a single light bulb would be (obviously, landfills, where many, many bulbs could be disposed, are a different matter). The EPA recommendations might just be typical err-on-the-side-of-caution overkill. Plus, fluorescent bulbs have been in people's homes and businesses for many years without major reports of death or illness (or lawsuits against manufacturers).

I'd bet almost anything that the overwhelming majority of people who break a fluorescent bulb dispose of it the same way they do any other bulb, and that a lot of them vacuum up the glass shards. Plus, I doubt people will evacuate and ventilate the room and turn off central heat or air conditioning either.

I agree. As a kid, I played with the mercury that spilled from broken thermometers with my fingers, fascinated with the way the beads of liquid metal would move around, merge and separate. I am not aware of any injury to my health that may have occurred -- although I might not recognize it if I got brain damage from playing with mercury as a kid.

silvercamaro wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

wintergreen48 wrote:

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

Here's what Snopes has to say about the levels of mercury in a light bulb and the danger involved.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

It's hard to say, based on the EPA recommended procedures, just how big a risk breaking a single light bulb would be (obviously, landfills, where many, many bulbs could be disposed, are a different matter). The EPA recommendations might just be typical err-on-the-side-of-caution overkill. Plus, fluorescent bulbs have been in people's homes and businesses for many years without major reports of death or illness (or lawsuits against manufacturers).

I'd bet almost anything that the overwhelming majority of people who break a fluorescent bulb dispose of it the same way they do any other bulb, and that a lot of them vacuum up the glass shards. Plus, I doubt people will evacuate and ventilate the room and turn off central heat or air conditioning either.

I agree. As a kid, I played with the mercury that spilled from broken thermometers with my fingers, fascinated with the way the beads of liquid metal would move around, merge and separate. I am not aware of any injury to my health that may have occurred -- although I might not recognize it if I got brain damage from playing with mercury as a kid.

Ooh, i got a new nickname for you...

Spoiler

quicksilvercamaro

Phil Ken Sebbin wrote:
Ooh, i got a new nickname for you...

Spoiler

quicksilvercamaro

I like it.

silvercamaro wrote: I agree. As a kid, I played with the mercury that spilled from broken thermometers with my fingers, fascinated with the way the beads of liquid metal would move around, merge and separate. I am not aware of any injury to my health that may have occurred -- although I might not recognize it if I got brain damage from playing with mercury as a kid.

I remember in our high school chemistry class that the teacher brought in a sample of mercury which he put in a paper cup (I'm guessing it was about a fluid ounce) for us to examine. We were told not to touch it (I think at our age we were smart enough to figure out not to eat it without being warned), but nobody took any precautions about vapors and it stayed in the classroom all that day.

Funny how the 2 folks that had experience with Mercury both have "silver' in their names (quicksilver, of course)

Oh crap!

I didnt notice PKS's post about quicksilver until i posted.

So sorry

Moonie the unoriginal

moonie wrote:Oh crap!

I didnt notice PKS's post about quicksilver until i posted.

So sorry

Moonie the unoriginal

No problem. I had it spoilerized so you couldn't see it. I missed the SSS thing so you can share the credit.

silvercamaro wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

wintergreen48 wrote:

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

Here's what Snopes has to say about the levels of mercury in a light bulb and the danger involved.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

It's hard to say, based on the EPA recommended procedures, just how big a risk breaking a single light bulb would be (obviously, landfills, where many, many bulbs could be disposed, are a different matter). The EPA recommendations might just be typical err-on-the-side-of-caution overkill. Plus, fluorescent bulbs have been in people's homes and businesses for many years without major reports of death or illness (or lawsuits against manufacturers).

I'd bet almost anything that the overwhelming majority of people who break a fluorescent bulb dispose of it the same way they do any other bulb, and that a lot of them vacuum up the glass shards. Plus, I doubt people will evacuate and ventilate the room and turn off central heat or air conditioning either.

I agree. As a kid, I played with the mercury that spilled from broken thermometers with my fingers, fascinated with the way the beads of liquid metal would move around, merge and separate. I am not aware of any injury to my health that may have occurred -- although I might not recognize it if I got brain damage from playing with mercury as a kid.

There you go!

silvercamaro wrote:

silverscreenselect wrote:

wintergreen48 wrote:

Perhaps, but mercury is a poisonous heavy metal and I suspect it is responsible for far more illnesses than uranium. Not to mention Mad Hatters.

Here's what Snopes has to say about the levels of mercury in a light bulb and the danger involved.

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/cfl.asp

It's hard to say, based on the EPA recommended procedures, just how big a risk breaking a single light bulb would be (obviously, landfills, where many, many bulbs could be disposed, are a different matter). The EPA recommendations might just be typical err-on-the-side-of-caution overkill. Plus, fluorescent bulbs have been in people's homes and businesses for many years without major reports of death or illness (or lawsuits against manufacturers).

I'd bet almost anything that the overwhelming majority of people who break a fluorescent bulb dispose of it the same way they do any other bulb, and that a lot of them vacuum up the glass shards. Plus, I doubt people will evacuate and ventilate the room and turn off central heat or air conditioning either.

I agree. As a kid, I played with the mercury that spilled from broken thermometers with my fingers, fascinated with the way the beads of liquid metal would move around, merge and separate. I am not aware of any injury to my health that may have occurred -- although I might not recognize it if I got brain damage from playing with mercury as a kid.

And I'm much too polite to say anything on the bored.

ulysses5019 wrote:
And I'm much too polite to say anything on the bored.

I knew I'd left myself open. I made bets with myself about who would be the first to respond, and I was surprised only by the fact that it wasn't you.

No soup for U-ly!

Nihil obstat®