2011-06-27

bellinghman: (Default)
2011-06-27 10:11 am

Evolving etiquette #2

We walked past the newer 'shrine' on Saturday morning, and had a closer look. I now have another question. Why do people put in them what they do?

a) Flowers. OK, that's what we expect - they're a symbol of the fleeting nature of life.

b) A reproduction road sign, for Stamford Bridge. OK, that has meaning, the dead teenager was a Chelsea fan.

c) Cans of Red Bull and bottles of Lucozade. Hmm, well, there is a long history of libatory drinks, and given the driver was apparently drunk, alcoholic ones would have been inappropriate.

d) A shrink wrapped ball of string.

Yes, you read that right. A ball of string, still in its polythene wrapping.

Perhaps that last one just fell out of a shopping bag while the owner was laying something else.
bellinghman: (Default)
2011-06-27 01:44 pm
Entry tags:

[livejournal.com profile] autopope should stay away

It's now 32.5C in this corner of southern England. And there's also a reasonable humidity index - not enough to be positively oppressive, but enough that it can't be termed a dry heat.

Yes, that's 90.5 Fahrenheit. And we don't even have the heat island excuse that London could use.

In other news, we're probably not going to be available for [livejournal.com profile] feorag's potential trip darn Sarf, since we're likely to be over at Silverstone again next Sunday. We can't really put it off to the following weekend, since there's a Formula 1 GP taking place that day, and we have no desire to get caught in the traffic.
bellinghman: (Default)
2011-06-27 02:43 pm

When Wikipedia goes wrong

Today's front page article on Baconnaise contains a table listing the supposed nutritional values per 13g serving.

It would appear that a serving contains 0.08 kCal of energy.

It also manages to contain 9g of fat (a figure not surprising in anything like a mayonnaise, which is after all a way of consuming flavoured emulsified oils).

Something that manages to be both mostly fat, and almost free from calories? I don't think so. I think it's not 0.08 kCal, I think it's 0.08 MCal, or 80 kCal, three orders of magnitude higher than quoted.

ETA: Oh dear, it was all too much for [livejournal.com profile] tisiphone, so you'll have to look back in the history to see what I was on about.