Thursday, 4 September 2014

¿La arquitectura puede hacer milagros? La búsqueda de hacer Gaudi un santo

Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Translate Request has too much data
Parameter name: request
Can Architecture Perform Miracles? The Quest to Make Gaudi a Saint

Visiting the dripping sand castle basilica that is the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona could definitely be described as one of the most awe-inducing moments of my life. A spiritual experience? Perhaps. But is it a miracle? That's what a group of believers are trying to prove in their campaign to make its architect, Antoni Gaudi, a saint.

If named, Gaudi would, in fact, be the first architect to achieve sainthood. This would place him in a very exclusive club of individuals who have been named saints without holding a formal role in the church (like popes and bishops). But why Gaudi over someone like, say Michelangelo or Leonardo da Vinci, who certainly contributed a great deal of their art and design talents to the church? Or any of the hundreds of other Roman Catholic artists and architects?

"Gaudi devoted his life to God," Gabriela González-Cremona told me, a lawyer who is working with the Association of the Beatification of Antoni Gaudi. "He honored God by means of prayers and his masterpieces. Both his life and his work give testimony and intensify the faith to whoever contemplates them."

Can Architecture Perform Miracles? The Quest to Make Gaudi a Saint

The Sagrada Familia, under construction in 1915. It might be finished by 2026

The proof, the association claims, is evident in his devotion to his architecture. Gaudi completed many influential buildings throughout Spain, mostly in the city of Barcelona. But it's his work on one particular structure, which came to consume his whole life, that's of particular interest to the church. The genre-bending Sagrada Familia is certainly one of the most famous buildings in the world—and equally famous for being perpetually under construction since 1882, with no completion in sight.

Nicknamed "God's Architect" long before the beatification campaign, Gaudi was, by all accounts, an extremely spiritual person. Born in 1852, he was deeply inspired by nature as he began working in his father's metal shop. He never married, which some offer as evidence that he chose to live his life like a member of the cloth. At the age of 31 he began working on the Sagrada Familia, which slowly took over his entire professional career. In fact, for the last 10 years of his life he swore off all other commissions, eventually relinquishing his possessions and moving into his tiny workshop at the basilica. After being struck by a streetcar at the age of 73, he died a few weeks later, in 1926.

The process of beatifying Antonio Gaudi was initiated in 1992, as a group of religious figures, architects, canonical lawyers, and other followers began the campaign, embarking upon what is essentially a mountain of paperwork. In 1998, local bishops gave their approval to move the campaign forward. In 2003, the process was officially initiated at the Vatican. The campaign has now created a publication which outlines Gaudi's life and major works, and documents the entire beatification process up until this point.

Can Architecture Perform Miracles? The Quest to Make Gaudi a Saint

Gaudi's no-frills workshop in the Sagrada Familia, which eventually served as his home as well, is evidence that he lived humbly before God

Like you'd expect, sainthood, or canonization, doesn't come easy. In the Catholic Church, it's actually a three-step process, with a person named first as Venerable, then Blessed, then full-on Saint. The level of blessed (beatification) requires evidence of one miracle. To achieve sainthood (canonization), the church needs proof that the person in question has performed two miracles. (Martyrs—those who gave their lives for the church—only need one miracle total, which makes total sense.)

The miracle-proving is arduous. "It's not the hardest part but the most laborious of the process, because the Vatican is strict and requires the deep study of experts who can demonstrate that the miracle has been made without a scientific explanation," says González-Cremona. Essentially there is a Vatican panel of lawyers and medical experts whose jobs are to examine the miracles and determine that there is no possible scientific basis for how those miracles could have been performed. As you might guess, this has become a bit more difficult lately. Mother Teresa was beatified in 2003 but her second miracle has yet to be confirmed, so she's no saint (yet). Plus, the church has been criticized in recent years for relying too much on medical miracles—lots and lots of evaporating kidney stones in there—and not enough on miracles of the contemporary age.

When it comes to Gaudi, the association has been busy collecting hundreds of testimonies which could be offered up to the Vatican for miracle consideration. According to the documentation provided to me, these are stories from people who have prayed to Gaudi to help them with problems ranging from unemployment, to creative inspiration, to health issues, and have seen results.

Consider this story from P. José Lino Yáñez, a tourist from Santiago, who wrote this testimony in 2005:

"A year ago, Barcelona was shocked by a train accident on its underground line. I had been taking part in a mass in the crypt and praying before Gaudi's tomb… I was concentrating on reading the pamphlet about Gaudi when the aforementioned crash took place. I was thrown out of my seat and found myself lying in the aisle... This accident could have had serious consequences for me (I am 69 years old). I wasn't even left with a bruise. A year later, I would like to thank the Catalan Servant of God for his protection."

The process of engaging with Gaudi's work has even converted some architects and artists to Catholicism, according to the documentation. The Japanese architect Kenji Imai, reportedly converted to Catholicism upon visiting the Sagrada Familia. A sculptor, Etsuro Sotoo, moved to Barcelona to work on the basilica and converted from Shintoism to Catholicism—a very compelling argument for the power of his faith.

As the story of Gaudi's beatification got passed around the architectural blogs, a wisecrack that most writers couldn't help making was about the famously incomplete Sagrada Familia, which might be finished in time for the centenary of Gaudi's death, in 2026. If Gaudi could perform miracles, they asked, why is it still not done?

The Sagrada Familia's unfinished status might actually be more proof that Gaudi was guided by a celestial hand. One practical reason the Sagrada Familia is not complete is because it is considered an expiatory cathedral, González-Cremona tells me. It must be completed with donations from the faithful, not government funding, something that is widely misunderstood by the general public.

But comments made by Gaudi himself, when he was still alive, seem to prove that he was operating on more of a divine timetable. "When Gaudi was asked about when the construction of the expiatory temple of the Sagrada Familia would be finished, he would respond: 'My client is not in a rush,'" says José Manuel Almuzara Pérez, an architect and president of the association.

Although there are reports from local media that Gaudi's beatification may occur within the next year, Almuzara Pérez prefers to take a similar stance as God's Architect himself when it comes to predicting the achievement of Gaudi's sainthood. "In the same manner, only God knows when the beatification process of Antoni Gaudi will conclude," he says. "Like Gaudi, we want to work without rushing, studying deeply the biographic content, the testimonies, the writings. We do not propose a set date. Who can calculate and set a date before a miracle?"

Can Architecture Perform Miracles? The Quest to Make Gaudi a Saint

Is this evidence of divine intervention? Looking up inside the Sagrada Familia, photo by SBA73

Hypothetically, I keep trying to imagine a group of Americans making the same case for Frank Lloyd Wright (he was Unitarian, but stay with me here). He didn't have a Sagrada Familia, but he has buildings which have required constant and diligent upkeep long after his death. And, of course, a gas station which was completed 87 years after he designed it. Wright definitely had followers and even what might be considered disciples, including those who learned his way of working and are passing it along to the next generation at his school, Taliesin West. When you visit the plot of Arizona desert where Wright lived and practiced, you can feel his presence quite distinctly. It would not be out of the realm of possibility for some people to pray to him and believe that he had helped to answer their prayers.

The fact that Gaudi's method of working—perhaps you would call it devotion—has inspired so many to continue in his footsteps, in service of the church, is definitely notable. Is there any architect working today who has spent 40 years on the same project? Does contemporary architecture culture even permit that kind of thing? There are plenty of famous unfinished buildings around the world—many of them are churches and abbeys, in fact—but when you look at the Sagrada Familia, it does seem to be a special exception. Gaudi's idea has not only captivated the world, it has remained an active construction site for over 100 years. That's no small feat, and it's a testament to his talent. Maybe that's the miracle.

Still, I have to admit, when I'm standing before his life's work, watching the cranes hovering above the impossibly elongated and intricately decorated spires which belong to no clear architectural era and defy all categorization, it does feels like there are some greater forces at play here, helping to realize Gaudi's impossible vision.

The Sagrata Familia in 2009, photo by Tassilirosmar

Un Robovac que mira el techo para seguir la pista de dónde se limpia

The underlying connection was closed: A connection that was expected to be kept alive was closed by the server.
A Robovac That Watches the Ceiling To Keep Track of Where It's Cleaned

En el mundo del robot, aspiradoras no rango muy alto en la escala de inteligencia. Generalmente están programados a deambular sin rumbo y limpiar hasta que se quedaron sin energía, y espero que en ese punto al azar han dado cada centímetro de sus pisos. Con el Scout RX1, Miele adopta un enfoque mejor mediante el uso de una cámara apuntada a su techo a la pista donde el robot limpieza.

Otras aspiradoras robot han utilizado métodos similares, pero generalmente requieren un dispositivo separado ese patrón de proyectos un invisible infra-rojos en el techo para mejorar la precisión. El RX1 Scout tiene una cámara digital de alta calidad apuntando hacia el techo en todo momento, trabajar junto a un sensor giroscópico incorporado así sabe dónde ha estado, y donde debe ir.

No sólo significa enfoque el RX1 no aleatoriamente carece de un lugar, también permite el robo-aspiradora limpiar usando corre paralelo y hacia atrás a través de una habitación, por lo que es más rápido y prolonga la duración de la batería, lo que le permite limpiar habitaciones múltiples antes de necesitar una carga.

A Robovac That Watches the Ceiling To Keep Track of Where It's Cleaned

Sensores de infrarrojos orientado hacia adelante siete aseguran los $900 que Scout RX1 accidentalmente no chocarte con sus muebles o una pared, mientras que tres sensores adicionales en la parte inferior impiden conducir por las escaleras.

En una carga completa Miele afirma el RX1 durará alrededor de dos horas en su posición más baja, y gracias a su cámara siempre ve pueda regresar a su base de carga en su propia — y luego reanudará automáticamente limpieza exactamente donde lo dejó. Y sus hijos a hacer eso después de que tuvieron un almuerzo el día de limpieza y usted verá inmediatamente el valor de alternativa Autónoma de Miele. [Miele vía Appliancist]


View the original article here

Wednesday, 3 September 2014

Cocoa farmers trying to chocolate is the first clock

Cocoa farmers trying chocolate for the first time is a must watch

One would think that chocolate is universal. Something that is everywhere, that everyone can enjoy. It is not. There are people who have never tried, even farmers who break their backs to harvest cocoa beans for a few pennies in Ivory Coast. See their faces light up when they eat it for the first time.

See them marvel over this sweet food that comes from the coffee beans they harvest is incredible for me. First, because it is a joy to see their faces. Then, because it is a reminder of how incredibly lucky we are.

The chocolate is one more thing for us Westerners. It is irrelevant. We like to eat, sometimes we were delighted by it for a minute. But most often that is not only a drink more things our fat faces with. Do not think and the incredible effort and resources needed to do so. Take it for granted along with the million other foods and the other million privileges that we not fight and other technologies.

I'm not posting this sermon. This comes from a place of true wonder, to remind me about my own Comfortable numbness and a hundred things I take for granted every day. You will pass something fatal for one day and then you'll notice how much time lost complaining about this or that rather than enjoy the infinite number of stunning (Yes, all awesome!) things that exists to your around.

Now I need some chocolate.


View the original article here

6 F@nTa$ti) photos of art Glitch

An error occurred while receiving the HTTP response to http://api.microsofttranslator.com/v1/Soap.svc. This could be due to the service endpoint binding not using the HTTP protocol. This could also be due to an HTTP request context being aborted by the server (possibly due to the service shutting down). See server logs for more details.
GL II I I I I TCH. Sometimes a glitch is a catastrophe, yes, but sometimes these mistakes are beautiful. For this week's Shooting Challenge, you explored the photographic celebrations of the glitch.


View the original article here

Thursday, 31 July 2014

These amazing watches were built by one single designer more than 35 years

Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 8805.
Error in deserializing body of reply message for operation 'Translate'. The maximum string content length quota (8192) has been exceeded while reading XML data. This quota may be increased by changing the MaxStringContentLength property on the XmlDictionaryReaderQuotas object used when creating the XML reader. Line 1, position 8813.
These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

In the 1980s, as giant technology companies competed to create electronics that arrived in the most compact, grey boxes possible, a young designer named Daniel Weil was doing the exact opposite: Eviscerating the electronic guts of gadgets, from radios to clocks, exposing them to the consumer the most elegant way imaginable. And 35 years later, he's still at it.

Weil, who was born in Argentina and moved to London as a young architect in the late 70s, is the subject of a sprawling exhibit at London's Design Museum this summer. The show has taken a year and a half to plan and stage, parsed from more thousands of sketches and hundreds of objects. It looks at almost four decades of Weil's work as a partner at Pentagram, including album art for the Pet Shop Boys, cabin design for United, to the chess set design for the World Chess Championship.

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

Bag Radio. Image: Design Museum.

But the clear highlight of Time Machines: Daniel Weil and the Art of Design is a personal project: Clockmaking. Weil began designing clocks in 1979, when a client brought him a quartz movement and asked him to create a clock around it. But since then, Weil has designed dozens of timepieces, each realized in a completely unique way. "Time can be seen as this very flexible tool to communicate ideas," Weil recently told me. "That's why I'm fascinated by clocks: Every time I make a clock, it has a different meaning of time."

Weil's clocks look like sculptures, but they're really more like diagrams. Each contains a movement—which regulates the time—and a battery, two components that we rarely see separated. In Power Lines, the movement and the battery are suspended between the wires that carry energy from one to the other:

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

Likewise, the mechanism in this timepiece sits atop thick wires connecting it to the battery:

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

And in another clock, By George, Weil uses the wires to create a lattice-like drawing:

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

The distance between the components is what makes these timepieces interesting. By externalizing the components and connecting them with copper wiring, Weil is turning an electronic relationship into a spatial one. Suddenly, a clock isn't just a flat circle on a wall. It's a three dimensional diagram that shows you how time is kept in a physical way.

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

Other clocks incorporate even more visible movement. In Clock for an Architect, Weil houses the face inside a tiny shelter, while a rubber belt connects its hands to a time-setting mechanism. At the end of an ash plank, a single AA battery pushes power through two embedded wires in the wood.

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

The magical Clock for an Acrobat is even more kinetic: The walnut and brass face is set on a track that it rolls along as the time changes, moving a small glass bearing to indicate the hour.

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

But Weil isn't a luddite; he isn't pining for a world in which clocks make a triumphant return to prominence. Rather, he sees his sculptures as finding a new use for a mechanism that's been co-opted by modern technology. "We all use phones and computers to tell the time, so we have a display object that needs to find its role," Weil says. "We need to make new ideas for many objects, not just clocks, that are being displaced by the digital world."

In the end, these timepieces aren't just about clockmaking. They're an externalization of Weil's own design process, a mix of intellectual meditation and creativity that's perfectly mirrored in the clocks themselves. "There's an intellectual pursuit and a practical understanding, and the journey is the meeting of the two," Weil told me.

These Incredible Clocks Were Built By a Single Designer Over 35 Years

Time Machines is an exhibit that makes the opaque process of design transparent to the average visitor, but if you want the cliff's notes, look for the clocks (you can also buy three of them here). Check it out until August 25 at the Design Museum.


View the original article here

Wednesday, 30 July 2014

Offers: Small but powerful speaker, LG G3, game gear, Hunger Games

An error occurred while receiving the HTTP response to http://api.microsofttranslator.com/v1/Soap.svc. This could be due to the service endpoint binding not using the HTTP protocol. This could also be due to an HTTP request context being aborted by the server (possibly due to the service shutting down). See server logs for more details.
The Best Deals for July 29, 2014

Ofertas. Ofertas hasta donde el ojo pueden ver.

NITECORE i2 Intellicharge inteligente cargador de pilas Universal ($12) | Amazonas

Bolse 60W (5V/12A) 7 puertos USB cargador de pared/de sobremesa ($33) | Amazon | Promo código 7FKV4UYK

Nuevo: Ziotek Power Strip Libertador Plus con paso 5 Pack ($15) | Amazonas

PS4 | $360


View the original article here

Seagulls will not blow up if they eat Alka-Seltzer

AppId is over the quota
AppId is over the quota
Seagulls will not blow up if they eat Alka-Seltzer

Seagulls, or gulls depending on how much you dislike syllables, are considered a pest to many, a minor, avoidable annoyance to many more and the harbingers of death OH GOD LOOK AT THEIR COLD DEAD EYES! to my neighbour who doesn't get out much. Over the years, there has been a persistent and rather macabre urban myth circulating that gulls will explode if they're fed Alka-Seltzer. Sadly, we're here to inform you that this isn't true.

Though the myth has many subtle variations depending on where exactly you're reading it, it basically reads as follows. If you feed a hungry gull an Alka-Seltzer tablet or a similar product (gulls aren't really that discerning when it comes to their choice of indigestion relief if we're honest), upon hitting the bird's stomach, the tablet will work its magic and cause the gull to violently explode into a cloud of feathers and intestinal confetti. Why the myth always seems to involve gulls instead of another bird is presumably due to seagulls' propensity to eat damn near anything we humans throw them.

Some variations on the myth try to add a little science to the mix (while simultaneously demonstrating why you should never trust any answer on Yahoo Answers and the like) by insisting that birds lack the ability to pass gas, which causes the deadly and explosive build-up in the unfortunate bird's stomach that eventually causes it to paint the side-walk with its insides.

Our guess is that this pseudo-scientific, kind-of believable explanation is why the myth continues to persist even to this day, despite a clear and apparent lack of "OMG, watch these seagulls explode" videos on YouTube. (There are a couple out there… but let's just say the makers of the videos perhaps should have hired out for better video effects if they wanted to be more believable, rather than clearly just using things like fireworks stuffed in dead birds or the like.)

We will admit, though, the reasoning is rather convincing on the surface; we personally have never heard a bird pass gas and that's certainly not something usually covered in standard education systems.

Of course, once you spend a couple seconds thinking about it, even with just a basic knowledge of our feathered friends, you should easily be able to see the whole "Alka-Seltzer / exploding bird" thing doesn't make sense regardless of their ability to give a cloacal salute. (Hint: How do baby birds get food?)

But don't take our word for it, as veterinarian Mike Murray explains, just because birds don't typically pass gas, it doesn't mean their bodies aren't equipped to do so if necessary; if a bird ever needed to burp or fart, it could; it's just that its diet doesn't typically require it to need to.

As for air coming out the other end from their derriere's, to quote renowned bird-nerd and Director of Conservation and Field Research at an aviary in Pittsburgh, Todd Katzner.

The fact that birds can regurgitate food for their young suggests that they can also reverse the direction of other things down there.

And, of course, if they can pass gas on the one side and regurgitate food and gasses on the other, Alka-Seltzer simply isn't going to hurt them.

Weirdly, this isn't the only myth involving exploding birds, for example, there's an oft repeated "fact" thrown around that you shouldn't throw rice at weddings, or at all, because birds eat it, which causes it to swell up in their stomachs, killing them. In some versions, the rice causes them to violently detonate, but we presume this only happens when Michael Bay manages to get his hands on the rice first.

As with the Alka Seltzer myth, there is zero evidence to back up this claim and quite a bit of evidence to the contrary (besides just the simple fact that the birds can regurgitate, so even if it expanded too much, they could just do that if it became uncomfortable).

For instance, a 2002 study was done on this subject by biologist Jim Krupa of the University of Kentucky that was later published in a 2005 edition of the journal, The American Biology Teacher. Krupa was inspired to do a study on birds and rice after an almost even split occurred among his 600 students when he asked them if throwing rice at weddings was harmful to birds (45% thought the rice would kill the birds).

They started by experimenting with the expansion of various grains that birds commonly ate in order to see what the birds' systems could handle. What they found was that typical bird seed (the type that is now sometimes thrown at many weddings owing to the bird/rice myth) actually expands more than rice, at 40% expansion over rice's 33%. However, one type of rice did show pretty remarkable expansion- instant rice. Brown instant rice expanded at 240% its original volume and white instant rice expanded at 270%.

Few people throw instant rice at weddings as it's a lot more expensive than "regular" dried rice, but the question remained as to whether instant rice could burst birds' bellies or other parts of their digestive system. Again, getting around the bird's ability to regurgitate, conceptually it seems like instant rice wouldn't be a problem given how long it takes even dried instant rice to absorb moisture at around a bird's typical body temperature (for reference, pigeons sit around 100-110 degrees Fahrenheit or 37.7-43.3 degrees Celsius).

Given that it seemed to them safe enough to try from a conceptual standpoint, they decided to go ahead with testing instant rice out on real birds (Krupa owned 60 doves and pigeons), which he fed a diet of nothing but instant rice and water for 12 hours, as much as they wanted.

After 12 hours, the birds all lay dead at the bottom of their cages and Krupa was splashed with red paint by PETA after being fired for animal cruelty… Or… you know, the birds were all completely fine (which is what actually happened). Not only were they all not dead at the end of the day, but during the 12 hour period while they were munching on instant rice, the birds were closely monitored for any signs of distress. Not a single bird showed the slightest discomfort from eating the instant rice and, in fact, Krupa stated, "now they're kind of addicted to it."

How the myth that rice will cause birds' stomachs to explode started isn't known, but it has been around at least since the 1980s. In 1985, a state representative from Connecticut, Mae S. Schmidle, decided to do what seemingly all politicians do all the time- pass laws that are based on subjects they are woefully ignorant about while not bothering to do any real research to educate themselves on it.

Specifically, Schmidle attempted to pass a law forbidding people from being able to throw rice at weddings to "prevent injury and death of birds as a result of ingesting raw rice thrown at weddings", called "An Act Prohibiting The Use Of Uncooked Rice At Nuptial Affairs". The proposed penalty for breaking this law was to be a $50 fine.

As she stated,

The rice that's left, that's not in your hair or on your suit or in your bouquet, you leave for the birds. Unfortunately, when the birds eat the raw rice, they cannot digest it. When it gets in their stomachs, it expands and causes them to have violent deaths. I've heard from several ministers who say that the next morning after a wedding, they see all these birds toppled over because they got poisoned by the rice.

In truth, there is not a single documented instance of this ever happening.

She also went on to state that she knew at least one other state that outlawed throwing rice at weddings for this reason. When asked which state, Schmidle replied that she didn't know. (seriously)

Several ornithologists came forward and expressed their extreme skepticism over Schmidle's claims, such as Roland C. Clement, president of the Connecticut Ornithological Association, who stated,

It sounds crazy. I have 50 years of professional experience as a practicing ornithologist and I've never heard of such a thing before. Of course, there can always be a first time, but I would have to see some evidence before I would promote the idea.

As no such evidence could be produced, the bill was never passed.

The myth got further traction thanks to Ann Landers, a.k.a. Esther Lederer. Her column on May 21, 1988 stated the following:

Dear Ann Landers: I have never seen this issue raised in your column; but it is something that every prospective bride and groom should think about, especially those who love birds.

I am getting married in September and I'd like to have birdseed thrown instead of rice. Hard, dry rice is harmful to birds. According to ecologists [Yes, you read that right, ecologists], it absorbs the moisture in their stomachs and kills them. How can I get this message across to my guests, without sounding like some kind of nut? [Too late] My fiancé is a bird-lover, too, and says it's OK with him if I say this in the invitation- K.M.M., Long Island

Dear K.M.M.: A Connecticut lawyer has introduced a bill banning instant rice from weddings because it can indeed be lethal to wildlife. But to state this on the invitation would be in poor taste. Ask your bridesmaids and ushers to pass the word to as many guests as possible.

Landers later issued a retraction, citing a letter from Steve Sibley, a Cornell ornithologist who stated,

Rice is not a threat to birds. It must be boiled before it will expand. Furthermore, all the food that birds swallow is ground up by powerful muscles and grit in their gizzards.

Just shy of a decade later, Landers once again printed the same myth, presumably forgetting all about her column and retraction from 1988.

Today a good deal of people continue to believe this rice myth thanks to a cocktail of anecdotal evidence, ignorance and the fact that most churches ban people from throwing rice at weddings. In regards to the latter, the reasoning behind this has less to do with protecting birds and more to do with the fact that churches don't want to spend hours after every wedding they hold cleaning their grounds of rice.

If you liked this article, you might also enjoy:

Bonus Facts:

Another common stomach exploding myth is that if you swallow Pop Rocks, it can kill you. In fact, Pop Rocks are not dangerous to eat, even when mixed with carbonated beverages (see: Why Pop Rocks Pop). This urban legend popped up just a few years after Pop Rocks hit the market and the company was never successfully able to convince the masses that there was nothing too it, despite aggressive campaigns to do so. In the end, Pop Rocks were discontinued on a large scale due to poor sales, not because of any danger in eating them.Rather than throw rice, according to Garret Datz who attended the wedding in question, a certain bride got the idea to release butterflies above all the spectators as she and the groom were walking down the aisle after tying the knot. Releasing hundreds of butterflies might seem like a great idea and kudos to the people taking the time to capture them all. But in this case, there was a problem. After many hours stored in boxes, when it came time to release them from above, all the butterflies fell dead onto all the wedding guests… something of a metaphor for the way many marriages turn out, with the beautiful relationship dying a swift death when enclosed in the marriage box… In yet another wedding, rather than butterflies, a couple decided to go with doves. They went down to the pet store and purchased some. The problem was, doves at pet stores tend to have their wings clipped and these were no exception. As the wedding concluded, the doves were released. It was discovered at this point that the doves couldn't fly owing to the aforementioned clipped wings. Things went downhill from here. The doves attempted to ascend a nearby tree where they were subsequently attacked and killed by squirrels. The organist quipped, "[I'm] not going to play for any more weddings where the ceremony calls for an animal sacrifice."Top Image: Mati Nitibhon


View the original article here