I went through a huge ER Burroughs phase at about 9. Lots of imagination, and a lot of crafting worlds/cultures, especially in the Martian series (a pulp Tolkein, almost)...

Still, by the 6th or 7th Tarzan book, I started noticing more and more boilerplate paragraphs...

They do hold a special place in my heart, and I still can't watch most Tarzan adaptations (with maybe the exception of the '80s film version) because I get huffy over the 'ignorance' of having him perpetually pre-verbal.

Charles Dogson (Lewis Carroll) took nude pictures of Alice and other young girls (6 have surfaced, others are presumed lost)

What to make of it is the big debate.

Some have said that he was a pedophile (possibly a celibate one), and that 6 pages torn from his diary were to conceal this (one unsubstantiated theory: that he had written about proposing to Alice, then 11).

Others say that this is a misunderstanding, that the nudes would have been perfectly normal for a well-know amateur photographer at the time.

With torque the entire force generated by the engine gets split between the rotor and the body of the helicopter.

The difference with friction as a force is two fold. First, obviously, is that it would be in the direction of the rotors, not the opposite direction. Second, we're talking an incredibly small amount of the output of the engine being transferred via friction (easily as low as .01%). Third, it takes much more energy to spin the heavier body of the helicopter than the rotors.

So it would take very, very little to cancel it out.

Yep. And the quote is correct.

I was seeing "affected" in the first paragraph earlier (which was correct). Now I'm seeing "effected" (which is not.

The "affect" in the second paragraph (the quote), is correct.

@constructive crit. btw, the website you linked to has very bad grammar advice (I caught several errors with a quick skim)

@constructive crit, you're incorrect. Affect (with the accent on the first syllable) is a noun meaning observable emotion or feeling.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/affect

(my point about mistaking the Americas for Asia was that it was a brief mistake of some Europeans, and so probably not something the Vikings encountered)

b83

Probably. Trade routes between Europe and East Asia were well established 2,000 years ago. Viking raids went as far as Persia (see map in link below) and goods and stores from the farthest portions of the East no doubt reached them.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Viking_Expansion.svg

As far as mistaking the Americas for Asia... remember, most scholars knew the Earth was round, and knew that Columbus' math about the size of the Earth was wrong (he underestimated it severely). They debated whether a vast ocean lay between Asia and Europe, and some hypothesized a continent must be there 'to balance out the rest of the land'.

Columbus returned from the first voyage in 1493, and in 1507 (1 year after Columbus' death), Waldseemuller named the land mass "America". So if some Europeans believed Columbus landed in Asia, they didn't believe it for very long....

there's already an pedal-assist, enclosed, recumbent vehicle called a "twike"

Not every person who turns down an umbrella is being suspicious. I personally have no use for umbrellas, which is a fairly common opinion in this rainy city of Portland.

As a born and raised (now former) Jehovah's Witness, I would say that religious factors are probably the biggest ones for that religion.

But the religion has (1) long maintained a very strict anti-education attitude (which has loosened slightly in recent years) and (2) encouraged people to maintain a subsistence level lifestyle, to spend the extra time volunteering for the religion.

Of course, they also tend to convert poorer people more often than rich people, so it becomes self-selecting.

no more dangerous than cooking on a stove, with it's flames and 400+ degree oven

Notice the three words in the blurb: most, many, most

There's the answer to your question.

@titan

I really wonder why anyone would want to receive their coffee, meal, etc, with subservience, when you could have a mutual exchange of genuine friendliness instead.

Besides, a vendor has just as much right to not part with their goods, as you have to be discriminating with your money.

I'm no outgoing chatterbox, but I've always been treated well wherever I went in Europe. And I've been appalled at the behavior of other tourists (eg walking into a store, and barking English at a person, under the assumption that they speak the language)