Model Airplanes

plastic model airplanes? I'm looking for a plastic model airplane of a 1961 Cessna 172. It is also known as a 172B and Skyhawk. The model I need does not have a rear window, and has a fixed landing gear. Anyone know where I can find it before XMAS???

What can I do with my old plastic model airplanes and tanks? Usually World War I and II era fighter planes and armor. Any ideas? I'm running out of shelf space.

what is the rarest plastic Model airplane around? My Dad is super in to Model airplanes. He has collected them since he was a kid. He has just about every Model airplane out there so i'm not sure what would be the best one to get him for Christmas. He likes 1/48 scale in mint condition. What's the rarest one? the one he's most likely not to have?

Where can I find a plastic model airplane online? I'm looking for a model airplane that is either United Airlines or Air china and is a 747-400 and is around 14-18 inches long. I'm looking for the plastic ones that also include a stand, not the ones where the wheels are on the table. Can anyone please help me because I have been searching for a long time and still haven't found it yet. A link would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!!

How do I remove a decal from a plastic model and and reapply it correctly? I'm building a plastic model airplane right now and I just finished placing decals. After they dried I inspected my work and realized that one of the decals was placed upsidedown on the airplane. So I would like to know if anyway has any methods for removing the decal and reapplying it so it adheres correctly. Thanks

Pre-Painted Plastic Model Airplanes? I don't really want to assemble or paint any models. Is there anyway I can get WW2 and WW1 planes that I can just hang up around my room and I don't have to put it together at all? And is a reasonable cost too?

What's the best way to paint a plastic model airplane? My grandson is having trouble trying to get a perfect separation of different colours on wings, body, etc. Plus should the paints be flat or gloss? Are there special paint brushes?

Is masking tape effecting for covering parts of a plastic model airplane when spray painting? Is there any chance of the paint seeping under the masking tape?

Is there anywhere in Singapore I can bring my plastic scale model airplane to be professionally painted?

I obtained a very expensive denture formed of ACRYLIC plastic I was wondering if TOLUOL base plastic model cem? plastic model cement (airplane glue) would act as an agent to bond acrylic plastic as I have accidentally broken a small piece off of the denture.

plastic model airplane help? how do i prep the plastic for paint? prime? sand? rinse?

Anyone knows where to get model airplanes? To all Singaporeans! i want to know where to get those model airplanes, plastic kind, whereby u can fix it yourself, for a teenager. any model will do. thanks. appreciated. =)

Does anyone know where i can buy already built model airplanes in Melbourne? Does anyone know where i can buy already built model airplanes in Melbourne? And i would also appreciate it if you could tell me the price range. the reason i want already built models is because i am terrible at building the plastic ones and i can't paint. :) Thanks very much!

Why did Japanese use plastic models to fight Godzilla? Why did the Japanese use plastic model tanks and jet planes to fight Godzilla when they knew very well it would be useless? Is it because we put such restrictions on their military after WW2 that all they have are plastic model tanks and airplanes? They need better self defense for themselves next time monsters attack one of their major cities!!

Where can I get some inexpensive die cast (or plastic) airplane models? I'm looking for some items to decorate my huge new desk in my office.

What kind of paint is the Citadel paint for Warhammer 40k miniatures? I'm a noob and was looking to get into the warhammer game-scene thing, and i've been making plastic model airplanes for years now, can I just slap some of my Testor's on the models or, what?

What would you buy, a plastic airplane or a wooden airplane? A plastic airplane model which cost less or a wooden airplane model which cost more. http://collectibles.shop.ebay.com/items/_W0QQLHQ5fIncludeSIFZ1QQLHQ5fBINZ1?_nkw=airplane+models+wood+747&_sacat=805&_fromfsb=0&_trksid=m270.l1313

Have 1000 military airplane plastic models for sale. Looking for place to sell collection wholesale? Husband collected for 50 years; died 6 mos. ago. Collection is huge. Well maintained. Kits unbuilt, intact, w/instructions and decals. Need a buyer.

What is a hobby that is not expensive? I wanted to build plastic model airplanes because I like airplanes and the models themselves were cheap. Then I found out you need an airbrush in order to do any camo paint schemes, that's $100. Then I learned you need a good compressor, that's $300. So much for that.

Model Aircraft on the Net? Hey Everyone, I am looking for a Website that I can purchase plastic model airplanes on, Models like the ones sold on aeroplanes in duty free and less than $30 or £30 :) Thanks in advance!

do i need special paint for something plastic? i want to paint a few things inside my 88 camaro, to match my black and red theme, is there some sort of special paint i need to use for plastics and would paint for model airplanes, cars, etc work for this p.s. - my shift key doesnt work on my keyboard

Who make the best model airplane assembly kits? I used to make a lot of model airplanes when I was a teenager and would like to get back into it, but this time being more anal-retentive. I used to buy Airfix military aircraft but I found a lot of the plastic was warped. Is there a better company? Thanks. PS. I want to make aircraft from WW2 period.

Do kids still build model airplanes, cars, ships? Or is it just old guys now? I'm thinking primarily of plastic kits, like I built when I was a kid, but also wood (for ships and balsa for planes) and/or metal, etc, etc. etc. I know there are a lot of Lego sets and Zoobs and magnent construction sets and so forth. Do kids build airliners (737, 777, A320, A380, etc) or jet fighters (F/A-18E, F-15C, Su-27, Harrier) or cars (Mustangs! New Beetles, Honda Civics)? Thanks.

Can I paint over an acrylic primer with enamel paint? I bought some grey matt primer to give my plastic model airplane a nice base coat before I continue airbrushing but I hadn't realised it was an acrylic paint until i'd checked the manufacturers website after purchasing! as the rest of my paints are enamel (oil based), im wondering if it's okay to paint straight over the acrylic, or do i need to prepare the surfaces with something first? thanks for your help

Liquid cement is stuck in the tip, how do I fix it, so I don't have to buy another? My boyfriend and I are working on a plastic model airplane together. The liquid cement we bought to glue the pieces together has dried up in the tip of the applicator. Does anyone know how I can get the blockage to clear up, so we don't have to buy another one? We have tried: a safety pin a sewing needle & the round metal thing that comes with it

Is spray paint okay for plastic plane models? I want to paint some of my finished airplane models, and I want to know if basic spray paint in a can would be alright. Also, can I apply decals to a plane that's been painted by spray paint?

What can i make with plastic boxes? I work at a juice bar. We use a lot of yogurt a day. So the whit plastic containers for the yogurt are pilled up at end of the day. I want to make them useful, for example make ship model or airplane model with them. I need your help. Do you have any ideas what can i do with them. I like making stuff!!! :) thank you!!!

How to remove crazy glue from airplane model? So I crazy glued this part wrong and now it's been over 2days stuck. I've tried hot water and alcohol and I don't got the nail polisher thing people say will work so can anyone help? It's plastic.

Where to buy model kits of famous buildings, monuments, etc.? I know many people have already posted questions about model airplanes, models for science projects, and so on...But I was wondering if anyone out there knows of a decent online store where I could purchase scale models of world renowned buildings/monuments. For instance: The White House, The Pentagon, Golden Gate Bridge, Big Ben, Tower Bridge, Buckingham Palace, Houses of Parliament, Eiffel Tower, Arc de Triomphe, The Taj Mahal...you get the general idea. NO 3D PUZZLES, PLEASE. They're a lot of fun too, but I'd prefer more of a challenge. I would like wooden or brick and mortar models, but plastic is okay too. Thanks in advance for any answers!

plastic airplane decals help? hi i heard that there is this decal thing for plastic aircraft models that you apply before you put the decals on and then put on after you put on the decals. what is this called?

Plastic models ideas help? I love these airfix plastic model things (y'no glue it together and paint it) but im not a fan of aeroplanes, boats or anything army related! is there any other kind of plastic kit like airfix that makes other subject matter? Thanks!!

Is making model castles gay? I know most guys build model airplanes, model tanks, model ships, model trains, etcetera. But I've got a collection of model castles I built in our basement, and I'm also fond of building dollhouses. See, when my little sister was growing up, we didn't have the money to buy dollhouses. So my dad (with my help) promised to make her her own dollhouses. And now, I got hooked! I build wooden (not the plastic ones) dollhouses for a hobby! Most guys accuse me of being gay because I build model castles (most of which are fairytale castles. The white wall, blue or pink roof variety) and dollhouses! Is anything wrong with my hobby?!? Most guys reason it is, because they build TANKS, SHIPS, PLANES, while I build FAIRYTALE CASTLES! That's how they accuse me!

Tools for airplane model kit? Okay the last question... What basic tools do you need for a good looking airplane from a kit(plastic ones with the construction and gluing and painting ) a ( 1 - 72 ) examples : glue, paint... but be specific... and if possible can you list, in the different paragraph, advance tools for airplane model

Material that can be heat shrinked over plastic? I have a laptop with a webcam and the place I work at doesn't allow cameras. The last laptop I had, I took the bezel off and spray painted it and it came out pretty good but still looked cheesy and they let me in with that. I'm thinking that getting some material that shrinks and forms with heat will look more professional. I know they have this stuff for model airplanes, to put over the balsa wood frame but I'm not sure if that would adhere to plastic. Any ideas?

Whats the Best brand for model airplane kit? The ones with the best detail and construction for 1-72 airplane kits ( Mainly looking at military aircraft )...The plastic ones you glue together and sometimes paint... not the wooden ones ... some examples are Academy, Italeri, Revell.. I was considering to buy some since i have lots of time during the summer and would like the greatest detail ... thx~

ARE THESE AIRPLANE MODELS WOODEN OR PLASTIC? http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B000U7WSV2/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B0007P306E/ref=ord_cart_shr?_encoding=UTF8&m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&v=glance

Melting temp of Plastic? What is the melting temperature of plastic from a model car or airplane??

Hobby Shops in San Jose, CA? I live in the San Jose, California area more like Cupertino area is there any hobby shop in the San Jose that sell model airplanes i mean plastic ones which i just have to snap the pieces together. The planes have to be like boeing or airbus planes plz help me.

I was just working on an airplane model. Couldn't find my xacto knife so was using a box cutter knife. thinkin The dang thing is short and it is dull to cut plastic. So how did about twenty Arabs pull off 9/11 with nothing else? Anything can be used as a weapon. They proved it. So can we. The corner of your lap top can be used almost like an axe to punch in a skull at the temple. You can slam the heel of Your hand with all Your force straight into his nose. A woman can claw out his eyes, easily with her finger nails. You have teeth, so get the SOB down and forget any reservations bite deep, tear out his juglar and enjoy the taste of his blood. An air plane is full of potential weapons. Get him down by numbers, Then kick, beat and crush him to death.Jump straight up and down on him, slam the heels of your shoes right into his chest, right under the breastbone. These people want war like that, lets give it to them. War to the knife and the hilt of the knife. That is the American way. It is how your ancestors took this country. Who agrees with me?

question regarding balsa wood model airplane kits? I have been a plastic modeler for 30 plus years and I have always been interested in balsa wood display models but I'm not to familiar with some of basics. Looking at the guillows website and the products they offer I have the following questions 1. when you buy the kits do they come with an outer skin and if not what are you supposed to use to cover the bare wood framing 2. what kind of glue is used to hold them together 3. what tools will be needed to complete the kit I imgine these kits are paintable but not knowing what the skins are made of makes it hard to know if what I have will work or not any hints or tips would be greatly appreciated

The search for WMD's in Iraq has now officially (according to the GSA) cost more and lasted longer than WWII ARE WE GETTING OUR MONEYS WORTH??? WILL COMPANIES LIKE MONOGRAM HAVE PLASTIC MODELS OF THE AIRPLANES OF IRAQI FREEDOM??? WILL THE FUTURE GENERATIONS COMPARE MISSION ACCOUMPLISHED TO THE TERROR TRILLOGY OF 2050???

Magic flying card trick? About 5-8 years ago I remember seeing a guy in the mall that had this flying card? Now I know the regular card trick with the wax and the microfiber, but this card was different. This card floated above the users hand, and he was able to spin the card around his whole body, no strings, I checked myself, they were selling it, and I think it was about 30 bucks? But I don't remember. If this helps, it was one of those kiosks, where they sell all that junk, cheap little helicopters, those plastic guns, and those little model airplanes. So if anyone knows what I maybe talking about, lemme know, and I don't mean video tutorials, and again I know of the other trick but this was different.

How to make a rc aeroplane? Hi frnds i hav a rc car and im planning to use its machinery to make a rc plane on my own. I hav a model of plastic plane which is exactly as a boeing. Frnds ill be glad if u support me wit ur answers.

I'm moving 7 hours away from my house and I have something that is really breakable. I have a model airplane and it is really breakable, In think. It's wood and has a stand. Should I get a box and put plastic bags on the bottom then put the plane in then plastic bags on top. Or is there a place to take it in somewhere where a store will do it. Please give me advice. Thank you

sorry to bother you but wat is a really good hobby for someone? Umm, i always get a little bit bored and i always finish my homework early so i have nothing to do but stare at the ceiling the whole day, my dad and mom are divorced so i live with my dad, and both of my parents have to work til 9:00 or 10:00 so i don't know wht to do, i tried plastic model making and i probably made 100 airplanes, ships, tanks, and cars, i am so bored, sorry if i am bothering you Umm, i always get a little bit bored and i always finish my homework early so i have nothing to do but stare at the ceiling the whole day, my dad and mom are divorced so i live with my dad, and both of my parents have to work til 9:00 or 10:00 so i don't know wht to do, i tried plastic model making and i probably made 100 airplanes, ships, tanks, and cars, i am so bored, sorry if i am bothering you Umm, thanks for the ideas, still, I already play the cello, i go to the library every week, i beaten all my video games, and that's why it's hard for me to find a hobby, if i'm being a burden you don't need to answer sorry :P if you want to add some points to level up go ahead, i guess there's no bad ideas Umm, thanks for the ideas, still, I already play the cello, i go to the library every week, i beaten all my video games, and that's why it's hard for me to find a hobby, if i'm being a burden you don't need to answer sorry :P if you want to add some points to level up go ahead, i guess there's no bad ideas oops, i messed my additional details part :P

"Hobby Master" Die Cast kits? That honey of mine is a nut when it comes to airplanes. The problem is he's not that handy (when it comes to building stuff!!) so I want to get him a gift that won't require much skill in assembly. I've seen ads for die-cast aircraft kits by a company called "Hobby Master" - does anybody have any experience with these? How hard are they to build in comparison to say a 1/72 plastic model kit? Is glue required? All helpful responses are appreciated.

in HKG where can i buy following items :? a. japanese groceries...foodstuffs... b. metal /plastic diecast 1:200 scale commercial airplanes models. names like, phoenix, gemini, inflight, etc... thanks !

Can You Remember The First Time You Shopped At WalMart .....? http://www.sfgate.com/c/pictures/2005/11/27/pk_wal-mart_ap.jpg I'm just curious ... I'm watching the biography of Sam Walton (like him or hate him ... he was a very important man to America) and I honestly can't remember the first time I stepped into a WalMart ... or where. I can remember when I first heard of or saw a K-Mart (on a visit to relatives in Louisiana somewhere in the early 70's ... (my aunt bought me a bag of Army Men and plastic Dinosaurs) and I remember the first time I shopped a Sears (in Athens, Georgia when I bought a Japanese Zero model airplane by the Revel company) That sucker cost me $2.99 and I thought I was robbed!) How bout' you? Can you remember the first time you saw or shopped a WalMart? Thanks and thumbs up to all who answer ... just give me time to get back and read the answers. P冮Íçk-I got me a woody. : Ouch! ... I did say thumbs up to all .. didn't I? (smiling)

is it possible to make proto type aeroplane in home itself ? I want to make a proto aeroplane model using 1.thermocoal body, 2.thick paper or cardboard wings (Horizontal, Vertical, Flaps, slats etc.,) with corresponding angle 3.small motor as a propeller in wings and 4.small plastic tyres. Whether it can fly ? (Note : I know the concept of aeroplane design, and i want to assemble those things by myself only.) Anybody please give some tips on that (i.e, material, assembly or design etc.,) and also tell me how the remote can be apply to fly. Thanx in advance.. my dear friends.

Stress Testing Airfoil Models? I am currently preparing for a few wind tunnel tests on a NACA 2412 airfoil. The lab technician told me that before I can use the tunnel, I need to provide solid proof that the models will be able to hold up in the wind tunnel (up to speeds of 110 mph (30 psf)). In the technician's own words, "we need to know, without doubt, the models will not break in our tunnel. Model failure could destroy the facility. Typically we expect to see detailed engineering analysis or realistic proof loading (with a factor of safety) prior to testing." Does anyone know how I might be able to go about stress testing my models? They are airfoils made of solid plastic (chord length of 6" and span of 24"). So far, the only thing I can come up with is to stick them out of my airplane (when I am going >110 mph) and see if they can withstand the force. However, this doesn't seem like a very professional or accurate way to go about testing these airfoils. Thank you.

New you might be a redneck jokes;? 1)If you know how to make mixed drinks with a beer-dispensing plastic helmet, you might be a redneck. 2)If your porch is bigger than the rest of your whole house, you might be a redneck. 3)If you thought that the Unibomber was a wrestler, you might be a redneck. 4)If you ever used your ironing board as a buffet table, you might be a redneck. 5)If a tornado hits your neighborhood and does more than $100,000.00 worth of improvement, you might be a redneck. 6)You see a car in a museum only to realize you have one of that same model and year on blocks in your front yard, you might be a redneck. 7)You bathroom deodorizer is a box of matches, you might be a redneck. 8)If you let your twelve year old daughter smoke at the dinner table in front of her kids, you might be a redneck. 9)If your Halloween pumpkin has more teeth than your wife, you might be a redneck. 10)If your only tie is made of leather, silver and turquoise, you might be a redneck. 11)If you have ever taken reading material to an airplane restroom, you might be a redneck. 12)If you have ever purchased a 6-pack of beer with pennies, you might be a redneck. I have family that is guilty of 1, 2, 7 and 12.

Can a remote control airplane be recovered? I have an old balsa covered model and want to know if it's possible to recover (with mylar) and are there any tricks to taking off the old plastic? Sorry, I meant to say that I have a balsa framed model that is covered with some form of plastic covering (I assumed Mylar). I really don't know the age but may know more once I start peeling off the covering. Once I get to the servos I may have more info on the 'era' it was built. It's a P40 with 54" wingspan. Actually I don't even know if there are any servos left in it.

plastic model airplanes? I'm looking for a plastic model airplane of a 1961 Cessna 172. It is also known as a 172B and Skyhawk. The model I need does not have a rear window, and has a fixed landing gear. Anyone know where I can find it before XMAS???

plastic model airplanes? I'm looking for a plastic model airplane of a 1961 Cessna 172. It is also known as a 172B and Skyhawk. The model I need does not have a rear window, and has a fixed landing gear. Anyone know where I can find it before XMAS???

What kind of paint is the Citadel paint for Warhammer 40k miniatures? I'm a noob and was looking to get into the warhammer game-scene thing, and i've been making plastic model airplanes for years now, can I just slap some of my Testor's on the models or, what?

Why did Japanese use plastic models to fight Godzilla? Why did the Japanese use plastic model tanks and jet planes to fight Godzilla when they knew very well it would be useless? Is it because we put such restrictions on their military after WW2 that all they have are plastic model tanks and airplanes? They need better self defense for themselves next time monsters attack one of their major cities!!

Do you belong to the "new Church of Global Warming"? "Aliens Cause Global Warming" A lecture by Michael Crichton California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA January 17, 2003 My topic today sounds humorous but unfortunately I am serious. I am going to argue that extraterrestrials lie behind global warming. Or to speak more precisely, I will argue that a belief in extraterrestrials has paved the way, in a progression of steps, to a belief in global warming. Charting this progression of belief will be my task today. Let me say at once that I have no desire to discourage anyone from believing in either extraterrestrials or global warming. That would be quite impossible to do. Rather, I want to discuss the history of several widely-publicized beliefs and to point to what I consider an emerging crisis in the whole enterprise of science-namely the increasingly uneasy relationship between hard science and public policy. I have a special interest in this because of my own upbringing. I was born in the midst of World War II, and passed my formative years at the height of the Cold War. In school drills, I dutifully crawled under my desk in preparation for a nuclear attack. It was a time of widespread fear and uncertainty, but even as a child I believed that science represented the best and greatest hope for mankind. Even to a child, the contrast was clear between the world of politics-a world of hate and danger, of irrational beliefs and fears, of mass manipulation and disgraceful blots on human history. In contrast, science held different values-international in scope, forging friendships and working relationships across national boundaries and political systems, encouraging a dispassionate habit of thought, and ultimately leading to fresh knowledge and technology that would benefit all mankind. The world might not be avery good place, but science would make it better. And it did. In my lifetime, science has largely fulfilled its promise. Science has been the great intellectual adventure of our age, and a great hope for our troubled and restless world. But I did not expect science merely to extend lifespan, feed the hungry, cure disease, and shrink the world with jets and cell phones. I also expected science to banish the evils of human thought---prejudice and superstition, irrational beliefs and false fears. I expected science to be, in Carl Sagan's memorable phrase, "a candle in a demon haunted world." And here, I am not so pleased with the impact of science. Rather than serving as a cleansing force, science has in some instances been seduced by the more ancient lures of politics and publicity. Some of the demons that haunt our world in recent years are invented by scientists. The world has not benefited from permitting these demons to escape free. But let's look at how it came to pass. Cast your minds back to 1960. John F. Kennedy is president, commercial jet airplanes are just appearing, the biggest university mainframes have 12K of memory. And in Green Bank, West Virginia at the new National Radio Astronomy Observatory, a young astrophysicist named Frank Drake runs a two week project called Ozma, to search for extraterrestrial signals. A signal is received, to great excitement. It turns out to be false, but the excitement remains. In 1960, Drake organizes the first SETI conference, and came up with the now-famous Drake equation: N=N*fp ne fl fi fc fL Where N is the number of stars in the Milky Way galaxy; fp is the fraction with planets; ne is the number of planets per star capable of supporting life; fl is the fraction of planets where life evolves; fi is the fraction where intelligent life evolves; and fc is the fraction that communicates; and fL is the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations live. This serious-looking equation gave SETI an serious footing as a legitimate intellectual inquiry. The problem, of course, is that none of the terms can be known, and most cannot even be estimated. The only way to work the equation is to fill in with guesses. And guesses-just so we're clear-are merely expressions of prejudice. Nor can there be "informed guesses." If you need to state how many planets with life choose to communicate, there is simply no way to make an informed guess. It's simply prejudice. As a result, the Drake equation can have any value from "billions and billions" to zero. An expression that can mean anything means nothing. Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion. Faith is defined as the firm belief in something for which there is no proof. The belief that the Koran is the word of God is a matter of faith. The belief that God created the universe in seven days is a matter of faith. The belief that there are other life forms in the universe is a matter of faith. There is not a single shred of evidence for any other life forms, and in forty years of searching, none has been discovered. There is absolutely no evidentiary reason to maintain this belief. SETI is a religion. One way to chart the cooling of enthusiasm is to review popular works on the subject. In 1964, at the height of SETI enthusiasm, Walter Sullivan of the NY Times wrote an exciting book about life in the universe entitled WE ARE NOT ALONE. By 1995, when Paul Davis wrote a book on the same subject, he titled it ARE WE ALONE? ( Since 1981, there have in fact been four books titled ARE WE ALONE.) More recently we have seen the rise of the so-called "Rare Earth" theory which suggests that we may, in fact, be all alone. Again, there is no evidence either way. Back in the sixties, SETI had its critics, although not among astrophysicists and astronomers. The biologists and paleontologists were harshest. George Gaylord Simpson of Harvard sneered that SETI was a "study without a subject," and it remains so to the present day. But scientists in general have been indulgent toward SETI, viewing it either with bemused tolerance, or with indifference. After all, what's the big deal? It's kind of fun. If people want to look, let them. Only a curmudgeon would speak harshly of SETI. It wasn't worth the bother. And of course it is true that untestable theories may have heuristic value. Of course extraterrestrials are a good way to teach science to kids. But that does not relieve us of the obligation to see the Drake equation clearly for what it is-pure speculation in quasi-scientific trappings. The fact that the Drake equation was not greeted with screams of outrage-similar to the screams of outrage that greet each Creationist new claim, for example-meant that now there was a crack in the door, a loosening of the definition of what constituted legitimate scientific procedure. And soon enough, pernicious garbage began to squeeze through the cracks. Now let's jump ahead a decade to the 1970s, and Nuclear Winter. In 1975, the National Academy of Sciences reported on "Long-Term Worldwide Effects of Multiple Nuclear Weapons Detonations" but the report estimated the effect of dust from nuclear blasts to be relatively minor. In 1979, the Office of Technology Assessment issued a report on "The Effects of Nuclear War" and stated that nuclear war could perhaps produce irreversible adverse consequences on the environment. However, because the scientific processes involved were poorly understood, the report stated it was not possible to estimate the probable magnitude of such damage. Three years later, in 1982, the Swedish Academy of Sciences commissioned a report entitled "The Atmosphere after a Nuclear War: Twilight at Noon," which attempted to quantify the effect of smoke from burning forests and cities. The authors speculated that there would be so much smoke that a large cloud over the northern hemisphere would reduce incoming sunlight below the level required for photosynthesis, and that this would last for weeks or even longer. The following year, five scientists including Richard Turco and Carl Sagan published a paper in Science called "Nuclear Winter: Global Consequences of Multiple Nuclear Explosions." This was the so-called TTAPS report, which attempted to quantify more rigorously the atmospheric effects, with the added credibility to be gained from an actual computer model of climate. At the heart of the TTAPS undertaking was another equation, never specifically expressed, but one that could be paraphrased as follows: Ds = Wn Ws Wh Tf Tb Pt Pr Pe… etc (The amount of tropospheric dust=# warheads x size warheads x warhead detonation height x flammability of targets x Target burn duration x Particles entering the Troposphere x Particle reflectivity x Particle endurance…and so on.) The similarity to the Drake equation is striking. As with the Drake equation, none of the variables can be determined. None at all. The TTAPS study addressed this problem in part by mapping out different wartime scenarios and assigning numbers to some of the variables, but even so, the remaining variables were-and are-simply unknowable. Nobody knows how much smoke will be generated when cities burn, creating particles of what kind, and for how long. No one knows the effect of local weather conditions on the amount of particles that will be injected into the troposphere. No one knows how long the particles will remain in the troposphere. And so on. And remember, this is only four years after the OTA study concluded that the underlying scientific processes were so poorly known that no estimates could be reliably made. Nevertheless, the TTAPS study not only made those estimates, but concluded they were catastrophic. According to Sagan and his coworkers, even a limited 5,000 megaton nuclear exchange would cause a global temperature drop of more than 35 degrees Centigrade, and this change would last for three months. The greatest volcanic eruptions that we know of changed world temperatures somewhere between .5 and 2 degrees Centigrade. Ice ages changed global temperatures by 10 degrees. Here we have an estimated change three times greater than any ice age. One might expect it to be the subject of some dispute. But Sagan and his coworkers were prepared, for nuclear winter was from the outset the subject of a well-orchestrated media campaign. The first announcement of nuclear winter appeared in an article by Sagan in the Sunday supplement, Parade. The very next day, a highly-publicized, high-profile conference on the long-term consequences of nuclear war was held in Washington, chaired by Carl Sagan and Paul Ehrlich, the most famous and media-savvy scientists of their generation. Sagan appeared on the Johnny Carson show 40 times. Ehrlich was on 25 times. Following the conference, there were press conferences, meetings with congressmen, and so on. The formal papers in Science came months later. This is not the way science is done, it is the way products are sold. The real nature of the conference is indicated by these artists' renderings of the the effect of nuclear winter. I cannot help but quote the caption for figure 5: "Shown here is a tranquil scene in the north woods. A beaver has just completed its dam, two black bears forage for food, a swallow-tailed butterfly flutters in the foreground, a loon swims quietly by, and a kingfisher searches for a tasty fish." Hard science if ever there was. At the conference in Washington, during the question period, Ehrlich was reminded that after Hiroshima and Nagasaki, scientists were quoted as saying nothing would grow there for 75 years, but in fact melons were growing the next year. So, he was asked, how accurate were these findings now? Ehrlich answered by saying "I think they are extremely robust. Scientists may have made statements like that, although I cannot imagine what their basis would have been, even with the state of science at that time, but scientists are always making absurd statements, individually, in various places. What we are doing here, however, is presenting a consensus of a very large group of scientists…" I want to pause here and talk about this notion of consensus, and the rise of what has been called consensus science. I regard consensus science as an extremely pernicious development that ought to be stopped cold in its tracks. Historically, the claim of consensus has been the first refuge of scoundrels; it is a way to avoid debate by claiming that the matter is already settled. Whenever you hear the consensus of scientists agrees on something or other, reach for your wallet, because you're being had. Let's be clear: the work of science has nothing whatever to do with consensus. Consensus is the business of politics. Science, on the contrary, requires only one investigator who happens to be right, which means that he or she has results that are verifiable by reference to the real world. In science consensus is irrelevant. What is relevant is reproducible results. The greatest scientists in history are great precisely because they broke with the consensus. There is no such thing as consensus science. If it's consensus, it isn't science. If it's science, it isn't consensus. Period. In addition, let me remind you that the track record of the consensus is nothing to be proud of. Let's review a few cases. In past centuries, the greatest killer of women was fever following childbirth . One woman in six died of this fever. In 1795, Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen suggested that the fevers were infectious processes, and he was able to cure them. The consensus said no. In 1843, Oliver Wendell Holmes claimed puerperal fever was contagious, and presented compellng evidence. The consensus said no. In 1849, Semmelweiss demonstrated that sanitary techniques virtually eliminated puerperal fever in hospitals under his management. The consensus said he was a Jew, ignored him, and dismissed him from his post. There was in fact no agreement on puerperal fever until the start of the twentieth century. Thus the consensus took one hundred and twenty five years to arrive at the right conclusion despite the efforts of the prominent "skeptics" around the world, skeptics who were demeaned and ignored. And despite the constant ongoing deaths of women. There is no shortage of other examples. In the 1920s in America, tens of thousands of people, mostly poor, were dying of a disease called pellagra. The consensus of scientists said it was infectious, and what was necessary was to find the "pellagra germ." The US government asked a brilliant young investigator, Dr. Joseph Goldberger, to find the cause. Goldberger concluded that diet was the crucial factor. The consensus remained wedded to the germ theory. Goldberger demonstrated that he could induce the disease through diet. He demonstrated that the disease was not infectious by injecting the blood of a pellagra patient into himself, and his assistant. They and other volunteers swabbed their noses with swabs from pellagra patients, and swallowed capsules containing scabs from pellagra rashes in what were called "Goldberger's filth parties." Nobody contracted pellagra. The consensus continued to disagree with him. There was, in addition, a social factor-southern States disliked the idea of poor diet as the cause, because it meant that social reform was required. They continued to deny it until the 1920s. Result-despite a twentieth century epidemic, the consensus took years to see the light. Probably every schoolchild notices that South America and Africa seem to fit together rather snugly, and Alfred Wegener proposed, in 1912, that the continents had in fact drifted apart. The consensus sneered at continental drift for fifty years. The theory was most vigorously denied by the great names of geology-until 1961, when it began to seem as if the sea floors were spreading. The result: it took the consensus fifty years to acknowledge what any schoolchild sees. And shall we go on? The examples can be multiplied endlessly. Jenner and smallpox, Pasteur and germ theory. Saccharine, margarine, repressed memory, fiber and colon cancer, hormone replacement therap6y…the list of consensus errors goes on and on. Finally, I would remind you to notice where the claim of consensus is invoked. Consensus is invoked only in situations where the science is not solid enough. Nobody says the consensus of scientists agrees that E=mc2. Nobody says the consensus is that the sun is 93 million miles away. It would never occur to anyone to speak that way. But back to our main subject. What I have been suggesting to you is that nuclear winter was a meaningless formula, tricked out with bad science, for policy ends. It was political from the beginning, promoted in a well-orchestrated media campaign that had to be planned weeks or months in advance. Further evidence of the political nature of the whole project can be found in the response to criticism. Although Richard Feynman was characteristically blunt, saying, "I really don't think these guys know what they're talking about," other prominent scientists were noticeably reticent. Freeman Dyson was quoted as saying "It's an absolutely atrocious piece of science but…who wants to be accused of being in favor of nuclear war?" And Victor Weisskopf said, "The science is terrible but---perhaps the psychology is good." The nuclear winter team followed up the publication of such comments with letters to the editors denying that these statements were ever made, though the scientists since then have subsequently confirmed their views. At the time, there was a concerted desire on the part of lots of people to avoid nuclear war. If nuclear winter looked awful, why investigate too closely? Who wanted to disagree? Only people like Edward Teller, the "father of the H bomb." Teller said, "While it is generally recognized that details are still uncertain and deserve much more study, Dr. Sagan nevertheless has taken the position that the whole scenario is so robust that there can be little doubt about its main conclusions." Yet for most people, the fact that nuclear winter was a scenario riddled with uncertainties did not seem to be relevant. I say it is hugely relevant. Once you abandon strict adherence to what science tells us, once you start arranging the truth in a press conference, then anything is possible. In one context, maybe you will get some mobilization against nuclear war. But in another context, you get Lysenkoism. In another, you get Nazi euthanasia. The danger is always there, if you subvert science to political ends. That is why it is so important for the future of science that the line between what science can say with certainty, and what it cannot, be drawn clearly-and defended. What happened to Nuclear Winter? As the media glare faded, its robust scenario appeared less persuasive; John Maddox, editor of Nature, repeatedly criticized its claims; within a year, Stephen Schneider, one of the leading figures in the climate model, began to speak of "nuclear autumn." It just didn't have the same ring. A final media embarrassment came in 1991, when Carl Sagan predicted on Nightline that Kuwaiti oil fires would produce a nuclear winter effect, causing a "year without a summer," and endangering crops around the world. Sagan stressed this outcome was so likely that "it should affect the war plans." None of it happened. What, then, can we say were the lessons of Nuclear Winter? I believe the lesson was that with a catchy name, a strong policy position and an aggressive media campaign, nobody will dare to criticize the science, and in short order, a terminally weak thesis will be established as fact. After that, any criticism becomes beside the point. The war is already over without a shot being fired. That was the lesson, and we had a textbook application soon afterward, with second hand smoke. In 1993, the EPA announced that second-hand smoke was "responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths each year in nonsmoking adults," and that it " impairs the respiratory health of hundreds of thousands of people." In a 1994 pamphlet the EPA said that the eleven studies it based its decision on were not by themselves conclusive, and that they collectively assigned second-hand smoke a risk factor of 1.19. (For reference, a risk factor below 3.0 is too small for action by the EPA. or for publication in the New England Journal of Medicine, for example.) Furthermore, since there was no statistical association at the 95% confidence limits, the EPA lowered the limit to 90%. They then classified second hand smoke as a Group A Carcinogen. This was openly fraudulent science, but it formed the basis for bans on smoking in restaurants, offices, and airports. California banned public smoking in 1995. Soon, no claim was too extreme. By 1998, the Christian Science Monitor was saying that "Second-hand smoke is the nation's third-leading preventable cause of death." The American Cancer Society announced that 53,000 people died each year of second-hand smoke. The evidence for this claim is nonexistent. In 1998, a Federal judge held that the EPA had acted improperly, had "committed to a conclusion before research had begun", and had "disregarded information and made findings on selective information." The reaction of Carol Browner, head of the EPA was: "We stand by our science….there's wide agreement. The American people certainly recognize that exposure to second hand smoke brings…a whole host of health problems." Again, note how the claim of consensus trumps science. In this case, it isn't even a consensus of scientists that Browner evokes! It's the consensus of the American people. Meanwhile, ever-larger studies failed to confirm any association. A large, seven-country WHO study in 1998 found no association. Nor have well-controlled subsequent studies, to my knowledge. Yet we now read, for example, that second hand smoke is a cause of breast cancer. At this point you can say pretty much anything you want about second-hand smoke. As with nuclear winter, bad science is used to promote what most people would consider good policy. I certainly think it is. I don't want people smoking around me. So who will speak out against banning second-hand smoke? Nobody, and if you do, you'll be branded a shill of RJ Reynolds. A big tobacco flunky. But the truth is that we now have a social policy supported by the grossest of superstitions. And we've given the EPA a bad lesson in how to behave in the future. We've told them that cheating is the way to succeed. As the twentieth century drew to a close, the connection between hard scientific fact and public policy became increasingly elastic. In part this was possible because of the complacency of the scientific profession; in part because of the lack of good science education among the public; in part, because of the rise of specialized advocacy groups which have been enormously effective in getting publicity and shaping policy; and in great part because of the decline of the media as an independent assessor of fact. The deterioration of the American media is dire loss for our country. When distinguished institutions like the New York Times can no longer differentiate between factual content and editorial opinion, but rather mix both freely on their front page, then who will hold anyone to a higher standard? And so, in this elastic anything-goes world where science-or non-science-is the hand maiden of questionable public policy, we arrive at last at global warming. It is not my purpose here to rehash the details of this most magnificent of the demons haunting the world. I would just remind you of the now-familiar pattern by which these things are established. Evidentiary uncertainties are glossed over in the unseemly rush for an overarching policy, and for grants to support the policy by delivering findings that are desired by the patron. Next, the isolation of those scientists who won't get with the program, and the characterization of those scientists as outsiders and "skeptics" in quotation marks-suspect individuals with suspect motives, industry flunkies, reactionaries, or simply anti-environmental nutcases. In short order, debate ends, even though prominent scientists are uncomfortable about how things are being done. When did "skeptic" become a dirty word in science? When did a skeptic require quotation marks around it? To an outsider, the most significant innovation in the global warming controversy is the overt reliance that is being placed on models. Back in the days of nuclear winter, computer models were invoked to add weight to a conclusion: "These results are derived with the help of a computer model." But now large-scale computer models are seen as generating data in themselves. No longer are models judged by how well they reproduce data from the real world-increasingly, models provide the data. As if they were themselves a reality. And indeed they are, when we are projecting forward. There can be no observational data about the year 2100. There are only model runs. This fascination with computer models is something I understand very well. Richard Feynmann called it a disease. I fear he is right. Because only if you spend a lot of time looking at a computer screen can you arrive at the complex point where the global warming debate now stands. Nobody believes a weather prediction twelve hours ahead. Now we're asked to believe a prediction that goes out 100 years into the future? And make financial investments based on that prediction? Has everybody lost their minds? Stepping back, I have to say the arrogance of the modelmakers is breathtaking. There have been, in every century, scientists who say they know it all. Since climate may be a chaotic system-no one is sure-these predictions are inherently doubtful, to be polite. But more to the point, even if the models get the science spot-on, they can never get the sociology. To predict anything about the world a hundred years from now is simply absurd. Look: If I was selling stock in a company that I told you would be profitable in 2100, would you buy it? Or would you think the idea was so crazy that it must be a scam? Let's think back to people in 1900 in, say, New York. If they worried about people in 2000, what would they worry about? Probably: Where would people get enough horses? And what would they do about all the horseshit? Horse pollution was bad in 1900, think how much worse it would be a century later, with so many more people riding horses? But of course, within a few years, nobody rode horses except for sport. And in 2000, France was getting 80% its power from an energy source that was unknown in 1900. Germany, Switzerland, Belgium and Japan were getting more than 30% from this source, unknown in 1900. Remember, people in 1900 didn't know what an atom was. They didn't know its structure. They also didn't know what a radio was, or an airport, or a movie, or a television, or a computer, or a cell phone, or a jet, an antibiotic, a rocket, a satellite, an MRI, ICU, IUD, IBM, IRA, ERA, EEG, EPA, IRS, DOD, PCP, HTML, internet. interferon, instant replay, remote sensing, remote control, speed dialing, gene therapy, gene splicing, genes, spot welding, heat-seeking, bipolar, prozac, leotards, lap dancing, email, tape recorder, CDs, airbags, plastic explosive, plastic, robots, cars, liposuction, transduction, superconduction, dish antennas, step aerobics, smoothies, twelve-step, ultrasound, nylon, rayon, teflon, fiber optics, carpal tunnel, laser surgery, laparoscopy, corneal transplant, kidney transplant, AIDS… None of this would have meant anything to a person in the year 1900. They wouldn't know what you are talking about. Now. You tell me you can predict the world of 2100. Tell me it's even worth thinking about. Our models just carry the present into the future. They're bound to be wrong. Everybody who gives a moment's thought knows it. I remind you that in the lifetime of most scientists now living, we have already had an example of dire predictions set aside by new technology. I refer to the green revolution. In 1960, Paul Ehrlich said, "The battle to feed humanity is over. In the 1970s the world will undergo famines-hundreds of millions of people are going to starve to death." Ten years later, he predicted four billion people would die during the 1980s, including 65 million Americans. The mass starvation that was predicted never occurred, and it now seems it isn't ever going to happen. Nor is the population explosion going to reach the numbers predicted even ten years ago. In 1990, climate modelers anticipated a world population of 11 billion by 2100. Today, some people think the correct number will be 7 billion and falling. But nobody knows for sure. But it is impossible to ignore how closely the history of global warming fits on the previous template for nuclear winter. Just as the earliest studies of nuclear winter stated that the uncertainties were so great that probabilites could never be known, so, too the first pronouncements on global warming argued strong limits on what could be determined with certainty about climate change. The 1995 IPCC draft report said, "Any claims of positive detection of significant climate change are likely to remain controversial until uncertainties in the total natural variability of the climate system are reduced." It also said, "No study to date has positively attributed all or part of observed climate changes to anthropogenic causes." Those statements were removed, and in their place appeared: "The balance of evidence suggests a discernable human influence on climate." What is clear, however, is that on this issue, science and policy have become inextricably mixed to the point where it will be difficult, if not impossible, to separate them out. It is possible for an outside observer to ask serious questions about the conduct of investigations into global warming, such as whether we are taking appropriate steps to improve the quality of our observational data records, whether we are systematically obtaining the information that will clarify existing uncertainties, whether we have any organized disinterested mechanism to direct research in this contentious area. The answer to all these questions is no. We don't. In trying to think about how these questions can be resolved, it occurs to me that in the progression from SETI to nuclear winter to second hand smoke to global warming, we have one clear message, and that is that we can expect more and more problems of public policy dealing with technical issues in the future-problems of ever greater seriousness, where people care passionately on all sides. And at the moment we have no mechanism to get good answers. So I will propose one. Just as we have established a tradition of double-blinded research to determine drug efficacy, we must institute double-blinded research in other policy areas as well. Certainly the increased use of computer models, such as GCMs, cries out for the separation of those who make the models from those who verify them. The fact is that the present structure of science is entrepeneurial, with individual investigative teams vying for funding from organizations which all too often have a clear stake in the outcome of the research-or appear to, which may be just as bad. This is not healthy for science. Sooner or later, we must form an independent research institute in this country. It must be funded by industry, by government, and by private philanthropy, both individuals and trusts. The money must be pooled, so that investigators do not know who is paying them. The institute must fund more than one team to do research in a particular area, and the verification of results will be a foregone requirement: teams will know their results will be checked by other groups. In many cases, those who decide how to gather the data will not gather it, and those who gather the data will not analyze it. If we were to address the land temperature records with such rigor, we would be well on our way to an understanding of exactly how much faith we can place in global warming, and therefore what seriousness we must address this. I believe that as we come to the end of this litany, some of you may be saying, well what is the big deal, really. So we made a few mistakes. So a few scientists have overstated their cases and have egg on their faces. So what. Well, I'll tell you. In recent years, much has been said about the post modernist claims about science to the effect that science is just another form of raw power, tricked out in special claims for truth-seeking and objectivity that really have no basis in fact. Science, we are told, is no better than any other undertaking. These ideas anger many scientists, and they anger me. But recent events have made me wonder if they are correct. We can take as an example the scientific reception accorded a Danish statistician, Bjorn Lomborg, who wrote a book called The Skeptical Environmentalist. The scientific community responded in a way that can only be described as disgraceful. In professional literature, it was complained he had no standing because he was not an earth scientist. His publisher, Cambridge University Press, was attacked with cries that the editor should be fired, and that all right-thinking scientists should shun the press. The past president of the AAAS wondered aloud how Cambridge could have ever "published a book that so clearly could never have passed peer review." )But of course the manuscript did pass peer review by three earth scientists on both sides of the Atlantic, and all recommended publication.) But what are scientists doing attacking a press? Is this the new McCarthyism-coming from scientists? Worst of all was the behavior of the Scientific American, which seemed intent on proving the post-modernist point that it was all about power, not facts. The Scientific American attacked Lomborg for eleven pages, yet only came up with nine factual errors despite their assertion that the book was "rife with careless mistakes." It was a poor display featuring vicious ad hominem attacks, including comparing him to a Holocust denier. The issue was captioned: "Science defends itself against the Skeptical Environmentalist." Really. Science has to defend itself? Is this what we have come to? When Lomborg asked for space to rebut his critics, he was given only a page and a half. When he said it wasn't enough, he put the critics' essays on his web page and answered them in detail. Scientific American threatened copyright infringement and made him take the pages down. Further attacks since have made it clear what is going on. Lomborg is charged with heresy. That's why none of his critics needs to substantiate their attacks in any detail. That's why the facts don't matter. That's why they can attack him in the most vicious personal terms. He's a heretic. Of course, any scientist can be charged as Galileo was charged. I just never thought I'd see the Scientific American in the role of mother church. Is this what science has become? I hope not. But it is what it will become, unless there is a concerted effort by leading scientists to aggressively separate science from policy. The late Philip Handler, former president of the National Academy of Sciences, said that "Scientists best serve public policy by living within the ethics of science, not those of politics. If the scientific community will not unfrock the charlatans, the public will not discern the difference-science and the nation will suffer." Personally, I don't worry about the nation. But I do worry about science. Thank you very much.

does anyone want to read this ( i know its so wierd but maybe any yahooligans here wanted to see it ) caution! The Basics Where does fart gas come from? The gas in our intestines comes from several sources: air we swallow, gas seeping into our intestines from our blood, gas produced by chemical reactions in our guts, and gas produced by bacteria living in our guts. What is fart gas made of? The composition of fart gas is highly variable. Most of the air we swallow, especially the oxygen component, is absorbed by the body before the gas gets into the intestines. By the time the air reaches the large intestine, most of what is left is nitrogen. Chemical reactions between stomach acid and intestinal fluids may produce carbon dioxide, which is also a component of air and a product of bacterial action. Bacteria also produce hydrogen and methane. But the relative proportions of these gases that emerge from our anal opening depend on several factors: what we ate, how much air we swallowed, what kinds of bacteria we have in our intestines, and how long we hold in the fart. The longer a fart is held in, the larger the proportion of boring, inert nitrogen it contains, because the other gases tend to be absorbed into the bloodstream through the walls of the intestine. A nervous person who swallows a lot of air and who moves stuff through his digestive system rapidly may have a lot of oxygen in his farts, because his body didn't have time to absorb the oxygen. Encyclopaedia Britannica offers the intriguing statement that some people's farts contain no methane. The reason for this is apparently unknown. Some researchers suspect a genetic influence, whereas others think the anomaly is due to environmental factors. However, all methane in any farts comes from bacterial action and not from human cells. What makes farts stink? The odor of farts comes from small amounts of hydrogen sulfide gas and mercaptans in the mixture. These compounds contain sulfur. The more sulfur-rich your diet, the more sulfides and mercaptans will be produced by the bacteria in your guts, and the more your farts will stink. Foods such as cauliflower, eggs and meat are notorious for producing smelly farts, whereas beans produce large amounts of not particularly stinky farts. Why do farts make noise? The sounds are produced by vibrations of the anal opening. Sounds depend on the velocity of expulsion of the gas and the tightness of the sphincter muscles of the anus. How much gas does a normal person pass per day? On average, a person produces about half a liter of fart gas per day, distributed over an average of about fourteen daily farts. Whereas it may be difficult for you to determine your daily flatus volume, you can certainly keep track of your daily numerical fart count. You might try this as a science fair project: Keep a journal of everything you eat and a count of your farts. You might make a note of the potency of their odor as well. See if you can discover a relationship between what you eat, how much you fart, and how much they smell. How does a fart travel to the anus? One may wonder why fart gas travels downward toward the anus when gas has a lower density than liquids and solids, and should therefore travel upwards. The intestine squeezes its contents toward the anus in a series of contractions, a process called peristalsis. The process is stimulated by eating, which is why we often need to poop and fart right after a meal. Peristalsis creates a zone of high pressure, forcing all intestinal contents, gas included, to move towards a region of lower pressure, which is toward the anus. Gas is more mobile than other components, and small bubbles coalesce to from larger bubbles en route to the exit. When peristalsis is not active, gas bubbles may begin to percolate upwards again, but they won't get very far due to the complicated and convoluted shape of the intestine. Furthermore, the anus is neither up nor down when a person is lying down. How long does it take fart gas to travel to someone else's nose? Fart travel time depends on atmospheric conditions such as humidity, temperature and wind speed and direction, the molecular weight of the fart particles, and the distance between the fart transmitter and the fart receiver. Farts also disperse (spread out) as they leave the source, and their potency diminishes with dilution. Generally, if the fart is not detected within a few seconds, it will be too dilute for perception and will be lost into the atmosphere forever. Exceptional conditions exist when the fart is released into a small enclosed area such as an elevator, a small room, or a car. These conditions limit the amount of dilution possible, and the fart may remain in a smellable concentration for a long period of time, until it condenses on the walls. Why is there a 13 to 20 second delay between farting and the time it starts to smell? Actually, the fart stinks immediately upon emergence, but it takes several seconds for the odor to travel to the farter's nostrils. If farts could travel at the speed of sound, we would smell them almost instantly, at the same time we hear them. Is it true that some people never fart? No, not if they're alive. People even fart shortly after death. Do even movie stars fart? Yes, of course. So do grandmothers, priests, kings, presidents, opera singers, beauty queens, and nuns. Even Yoda farts. Do men fart more than women? No, women fart just as much as men. It's just that most men take more pride in it than most women. There is a large variation among individuals in the amount of fart gas produced per day, but the variation does not correlate with gender. I have read that men fart more often than women. If this is true, then women must be saving it up and expelling more gas per fart than men do. Do men's farts smell worse than women's farts? Based on what I have experienced of women's farts, all I can say is that I hope not. At what time of day is a gentleman most likely to fart? A gentleman is mostly likely to fart first thing in the morning, while in the bathroom. This is known as "morning thunder," and if the gentleman gets good resonance, it can be heard throughout the household. Why are beans so notorious for making people fart? Beans contain sugars that we humans cannot digest. When these sugars reach our intestines, the bacteria go wild, have a big feast, and make lots of gas! Other notorious fart-producing foods include corn, bell peppers, cabbage, milk, and raisins. A friend of mine had a dog who was exceptionally fond of apples and turnips. The dog would eat these things and then get prodigious gas. A dog's digestive system is not equipped to handle such vegetable matter, so the dog's bacteria worked overtime to produce remarkable flatulence. What things other than diet can make a person fart more than usual? People who swallow a lot of air fart more than people who don't. This can be cured somewhat by chewing with your mouth closed. Nervous people with fast moving bowels will fart more because less air is absorbed out of the intestines. Some disease conditions can cause excess flatulence. And going up in an airplane or other low-pressure environment can cause the gas inside you to expand and emerge as flatulence. Is a fart really just a burp that comes out the wrong end? No, a burp emerges from the stomach and has a different chemical composition from a fart. Farts have less atmospheric gas content and more bacterial gas content than burps. Is it harmful to hold in farts? There are differences in opinion on this one. Certainly, people have believed for centuries that retaining flatulence is bad for the health. Emperor Claudius even passed a law legalizing farting at banquets out of concern for people's health. There was a widespread belief that a person could be poisoned or catch a disease by retaining farts. Doctors I have spoken to recently have told me that there is no particular harm in holding in farts. Farts will not poison you; they are a natural component of your intestinal contents. The worst thing that can happen is that you may get a stomach ache from the gas pressure. But one doctor suggested that pathological distention of the bowel could result if a person holds in farts too much. How long would it be possible to not fart? As I understand it, a captive fart can escape as soon as the person relaxes. This means that a lot of people who assiduously refrain from farting during the day do so at great length as soon as they fall asleep. Having been on a great many overnight field trips, long bus trips, and trans-Pacific flights, I can personally vouch for the fact that lots of people do fart voluminously as they doze off. So the answer to the question would be, you can refrain from farting as long as you can stay awake! Do all people fart in their sleep? I have not made a scientific study of this, but I don't think all people fart in their sleep. I think mainly those who refuse to fart when they're awake do so when dozing off. For other people, toilet training takes such a strong hold that they let nothing pass their sphincters in sleep. For these people, the gas accumlates in the night and they vent it upon awakening. Where do farts go when you hold them in? How often have you held in a fart, intending to release it at the first appropriate opportunity, only to find that the fart has disappeared when you are ready for it? I asked several doctors where the fart goes. Does it leak out slowly without the person knowing it? Is it absorbed into the bloodstream? What happens to it? The doctors agree that the fart is neither released nor absorbed. It simply migrates back upward into the intestine and comes out later. It is reassuring to know that such farts aren't really lost, just delayed. How can one cover up a fart? There is a company called Fartypants that sells underwear designed to absorb the odor of farts. If you should be caught without your Fartypants, another ploy is to blame the dog or cat, if one should be present, or complain about how the wind must be blowing from the direction of the paper mill. As for the sound... if you are in a large group of people, act oblivious and innocent, or glance quickly at the person next to you, as if you think he/she did it. Other strategies include coughing or suddenly moving your chair so that people think that they misheard the fart. If you are with one other person, you can act as if nothing happened, and the other person may believe he was mistaken in thinking he heard a fart. CJT addresses the problem of farting loudly in a public restroom as follows: "My solution: use a handful of loose toilet paper, cover your butt hole and it will muffle the farting; my friends and I call it the 'Buff Muff'!" Depending upon the company, another strategy is not to cover it up, but to proudly proclaim the fart as your own grand accomplishment and to issue a challenge to the others to outdo that one if they think they can. Is it really possible to ignite farts? The answer to that is yes! However, you should be aware that people get injured igniting flatulence. Not only can the flame back up into your colon, but your clothing or other surroundings may catch on fire. A survey done by Fartcloud (the site, alas! is not more) indicates that about a quarter of the people who ignited their farts got burned doing it. Ignition of flatulence is a hazardous practice. However, if you want to try it, and you don't have a friend to light your fart for you, you might find it easier to accomplish the job using the Fartlighter. There have also been cases in which intestinal gases with a higher than normal oxygen content have exploded during surgery when electric cautery was used by the surgeon. Why is it possible to burn farts? Farts burn because they contain methane (usually) and hydrogen, both of which are flammable gases. (Hydrogen was the same gas that was used in the ill fated Hindenburg dirigible.) Farts tend to burn with a blue or yellow flame. Is it possible to light a match with a fart? No, even strike-anywhere matches have their limits, unless the fart has the consistency of sandpaper! Any fart that rough I would hesitate to call a fart. Also, farts have the same temperature as the body from which they emerge, and aren't hot enough to initiate combustion. Are there any books about farting? There are several! My favorite is the new book, Who Cut the Cheese: A Cultural History of the Fart by Jim Dawson. This book provides an entertaining and thought-provoking history of the fart in literature, language and society. It is very informative and very funny! Ben Franklin's classic Fart Proudly is still in print. There is a collection of suggestive photographs called Who Farted Now by St. Martin's Press. Most of the photos come from old movies and political shots. For children, we have the famous The Gas We Pass : The Story of Farts by Shinta Cho, and Amanda Mayer Stinchecum (Translator), and the Canadian picture book, Good Families Don't, by Alan Daniel and Robert N. Munsch, about a highly visible fart infesting a proper middle class family. Is it possible for a talented person to earn a living through flatulence? Few people earn their living directly via flatulence. But a friend of mine says that he saw a carnival act in which the performer whistled tunes with his farts, blew out candles on the opposite side of the stage, and sent flames all the way across the stage. A famous performer who earned his living this way was Le Petomane, who performed in France at the beginning of the 20th Century. However, my friend isn't old enough to have seen Le Petomane, so maybe he had a chance to see Mr. Methane. Mr. Methane lays claim to the distinction of being the world's only performing flatulist. His CD can be purchased at the FartMart. However, people may also earn a living through the prevention of flatulence (as do the manufacturers and sellers of Beano and other products), through the practice of medicine specializing in the treatment of flatulence and other gastrointestinal problems, by writing books about flatulence (see the question before this one), and through the production and sales of various fart gags such as whoopee cushions and farts in a can. Fartypants sells a fart filter and a number of other fart-related products. Ultratech Products, Inc., sells the Flatulence Filter, "an activated carbon air filter disguised as a seat cushion." (This link was discovered by Steve of Boulder, CO.) Maybe, if you're lucky, you'll be able to find a copy of Le Petomane's biography by searching at alibris.com. Last time I checked, they had two copies available! What other fart products are available? You can visit the FartMart to obtain an astounding number of wonderful fart products, including the famous Crepitation Contest CD, and several other recordings, Pull-My-Finger Fred (a doll that responds with farts and wisecracks), whoopie cushions and a variety of other fart-noise generating products (some of which are quite high tech), some products which produce a fart-like odor, prosthetic poop, fart sludge, and the famous Fart Machine. Why do dog and cat farts smell so bad? A carnivore's protein-rich diet produces relatively small amounts of intensely stinky gas because proteins contain lots of sulfur. A dog's or cat's farts are rarely audible, but the odor is overwhelming. I have asked biologists why dogs and cats generally fart silently, and their theories include: (1) the amount of gas produced is small, but potent, (2) the horizontal orientation of their gastrointestinal system puts less pressure on the anal opening, so the gas is expelled more slowly, (3) their anal sphincters don't close as tightly as humans' because it takes less force to hold in the contents of the colon -- again because of the horizontal orientation of the gastrointestinal system -- and a loose anus makes less sound, and, my favorite (4) dogs and cats don't feel embarrassed about farting, so their sphincters are more relaxed, leading to less noisy flatulence. Mike F. points out that many dog foods are soy-based, so on top of all the above factors, add beans and stand back! Large herbivorous animals such as cows, horses and elephants, on the other hand, produce vast quantities of relatively non-stinky fart gas. The farts of these animals are noisy and can go on for astoundingly long periods of time. Cows in particular are productive, in part because they swallow huge amounts of air. They need oxygen in their guts for the various protozoa employed there as digestive aids. Is it normal for dogs to like the smell of human farts? Yes, any odor that we find disgusting smells delicious to a dog. Dogs respond to the smell of farts, rotting fish, and carrion the same way we respond to the smell of bacon frying or cookies baking. A dog will often sniff the butt of the farter in order to inhale as much of the odor as possible. I have heard only one story about a dog being disconcerted by a fart. According to a friend, her brother once delivered a fart so evil that it made the dog sneeze, shake his head, and paw at his nose. That was either an unusual fart or an unusual dog. Do fish fart? According to our ichthyologist at the University of Guam, fish flatulence per se has not been studied, although people have investigated fish digestion. They find that although most fish have alkaline intestinal environments like our own, coral-eating fish have acidic intestinal contents. The acid serves to dissolve coral skeletal material. Coral has the same composition as Tums (calcium carbonate). One product of the reaction between acid and calcium carbonate is carbon dioxide gas. Therefore, it is logical to assume that coral-eating fish fart a lot. The other fish probably fart also, for the same reasons that we do. However, Mike Pulte, a great fish enthusiast, said that he has never seen a fish do it. I asked our ichthyologist if it were possible that fish gas would go into the swim bladder instead of out the anal opening. He said that modern fish have an air bladder that is independent of the gastrointestinal tract. The gas comes from enzymatic activity and not from the intestine. Older models of fish have their swim bladder connected to the gastrointestinal tract, but it is attached high up, closer to the mouth than to the other end, and these fish come to the surface and gulp air to fill the bladder. Therefore, we can assume that intestinal gas leaves the fish through the anal opening. We also pondered the possibility of fish making noise via flatulence, but apparently most fish noises are made through belching rather than farting. Lisa P., an aquarium enthusiast, reports that she has seen her fish fart: "I have four aquariums and many fish, and I have personally witnessed fish farting! My goldfish used to do it all the time! You'd see a little bubble come out of his anus and stay there, trapped in the mucus of a long string of poop. (Ugh!) And my opaline gourami does it too. Neither of these are coral-eating fish. I have only owned two coral-eating fish so far, but I have never seen either of them fart. It seems most likely to me that much of this gas comes from air swallowed during eating. Also, goldfish have a very simple digestive system and their food is absorbed inefficiently, so possibly the bacteria have more to feed on" Do turtles fart? Yes, turtles do fart, and their farts smell incredibly bad, as do the farts of snakes. In fact, it is my opinion, based on personal experience with reptiles and not on any formal research, that many reptiles use farts as a weapon. Reptile farts smell so bad that sometimes you can tell that one is nearby in the woods, even on a windy day, before you can see the animal. One day I was hiking through the woods in Arkansas with a friend and I told my friend, "I smell a snake fart." A second later, the snake crawled across the path. Astounding but true! In an article published in the December 2000 issue of Discover, "the world's leading expert on snake sounds," Bruce Young of LaFayette College in Easton, Pennsylvania, affirmed that snakes do fart. The sonoran coral snake and the western hook-nosed snake fart with an audible popping sound when disturbed. Why do horse farts smell worse than people's farts? I'm not sure that horse farts smell worse than our farts, but they do smell different. Horses have a different diet from us and different gut microbes, so their farts have a different composition. They also fart more voluminously than humans, and the volume of the gas can be overwhelming if one is unfortunate enough to be near a farting horse indoors. What kind of animal has the highest worldwide output of flatulence? Believe it or not, the animal that wins this honor is the humble termite. Because of their diet and digestive processes (with more than the usual microbial assistance), they produce as much methane as human industry. Termite farts are believed to be a major contributor towards global warming. Is it true that cow farts contribute to global warming? Recent research has shown that most methane produced by cows and sheep emerges from the mouth rather than the anus. So one could more accurately say that cow and sheep belches are contributing to global warming. New Zealand researchers are investigating methods of breeding methane-free sheep. Is there any kind of animal that doesn't fart? If we define a fart to be an anal escape of intestinal gas, then it follows that animals that lack intestines or an anus cannot fart. Most animals possess intestines and an anus, but there are some that don't. These include: Sponges: These organisms lack true tissues and organs. They have just a few types of cells organized into a bag with holes in it. Water flows into some holes and out other holes. Sponges are so different from other animals that some biologists think we shouldn't even call them animals. Cnidaria: This phylum includes the jellyfish, corals, sea anemones and hydra. Their tissues are organized into a bag with a mouth surrounded by stinging tentacles. Food enters the mouth and is digested inside the bag, after which the leftovers are expelled via the same opening. In effect, the same hole serves as both a mouth and an anus. Any gas expelled by a cnidarian would be more appropriately termed a belch rather than a fart, since the animal lacks intestines and separate anus. Pogonophoran worms: These remarkable animals, who dwell on the sea floor near active volcanic regions associated with mid-ocean ridges, possess no mouth, no stomach, no intestines, and no anus. Apparently they retain their svelte, worm-shaped figures by giving up on eating completely! They survive by means of a mutualistic relationship with chemosynthetic bacteria that live in their flesh. Anyway, these animals cannot possibly fart. A second category of animals that probably don't fart are animals that live very deep underwater. At high pressures, gas remains in solution rather than forming bubbles. So there is a good chance that all those clams, echinoderms, fish and other animals living near the seafloor don't fart because their farts stay in solution and never emerge as bubbles, even though the animals possess perfectly good intestines and anuses. Is it possible to leave a brown spot on your pants because of a fart, and if so, what causes it? Judging from what I see when I do the laundry, I'd say that the answer to the first question is definitely yes. As for the causes, we must remember that what we call "fart" and what we call "poop" are just end-members of a continuum. That is, we can have a pure fart, or a pure poop, or anything in-between, depending upon the admixture of the two. If a sample consists mostly of poop with only a small fart component, you get such things as jet-propelled bowel movements and spongy, floating fecal masses (you know, the ones that refuse to be flushed down the toilet -- they keep popping back up). If the sample consists mostly of fart with only a small poop component, you get what is known as "skid marks" or "fart art." These can also result from inadequate wiping, but the shape of the stain is different in the two cases. Inadequate wiping leads to elongate marks parallel to one's crack, usually with well-defined edges, whereas fart art is generally more circular and has an air-brushed look. Fart art is most likely to occur if (1) a person is suffering from diarrhea, (2) the person is trying too hard to fart, and (3) the person mistakenly perceives the pressure against his sphincter to be gas pressure rather than liquid pressure. Again, that last situation is most likely to occur if the person is afflicted with diarrhea. How can we tell when it's only gas needing to come out, rather than something more serious? Our ability to distinguish between the need to fart and the need to poop is something that we learn gradually in the process of toilet training and early childhood. With the tactile nerve endings in the rectal area, we can actually feel different sensations depending upon what is waiting by the exit. Of course, sometimes we are fooled, especially if the substance at hand is extremely fluid in nature, and that is when we have the unfortunate accident of venting a squirt of diarrhea rather than an innocent fart. What is the best position for farting? That depends on what you are trying to achieve. Years and years ago, I read a novel (can't remember which) that had a character in it who was plagued with intestinal gas pain. The character would coax farts out by getting down on all fours with her butt in the air, pressing her thighs against her belly. So perhaps this is the best position for farting if you are having difficulty getting them to come out. Back when I was in geology field camp, we would sit around the campfire in the evening and ignite our flatulence. It was a ritual. When a fart was ready to emerge, the farter would announce, "I have one." And everyone else would intone, "Assume the proper position." The farter would lie back on his or her shoulders with back propped up, head between the knees, and posterior in the air. The purpose was to give the person with the match easy access to the critical vent. Expert farters of my acquaintance often shift their weight onto one leg and lift the other slightly when farting. I assume that this position is adopted less to aid in the farting process than to signal that a fart is imminent. Why do chicks always deny farting? I suppose I should start by saying that only some chicks deny farting. The rest of us acknowledge our gaseous accomplishments with pride. However, a great many sisters do deny farting. The reason is that they have been misled into thinking that farts are not ladylike. It is a great mistake to say that farting is not ladylike. The reason is that all people fart, including ladies. Anything that ladies do is by definition ladylike, and that includes the emission of anal gases. Is it possible that, by inhaling other people's farts all day long, my own farts will smell more? No, inhaled farts would go into the lungs rather than into the digestive system, and would simply be exhaled again, although it might be possible that some of the fart components might be absorbed into the blood. If you wanted to benefit from other people's farts in the way you describe, you would have to swallow them somehow. Is it possible to get stoned after inhaling two or three farts in a row? I am not aware of any intoxicating agents in flatulence. However, most farts contain very little oxygen, and you may experience dizziness if you are inhaling overly concentrated fart essence, simply from lack of oxygen. On the other hand, if you are inhaling farts in the open air and are breathing rapidly in order to inhale as much fart as possible, you may be hyperventilating, which also induces dizziness. Then there is the intrinsic hilarity factor: farts are so funny in both sound and odor that you might feel high just from the basic entertainment value of farts. Is it possible for a fart to kill you? A great many of you have asked if farts can be fatal, or if you can die from smelling a particularly bad fart. My initial response to this question was "no," but I thought I'd better ask a doctor. So now it is official, the medical opinion I received is no, a fart can't kill you. However, if you really work hard at it, you can manage to kill yourself with just about anything. I recently read of a man who hooked up his nose to his anus with a system involving a gas mask, rubber tubing and a hollow wooden post. He died of suffocation. This story comes from the Darwin Awards, and I personally cannot attest to the overall veracity of their stories. The story of the bed-bound obese man who died from inhaling his own flatulence (and whose farts almost killed the paramedics) is an urban legend that has been in circulation for some time. But according to Buzzbomb43, whom I quote: "In World War Two, the Air Force estimates that around 1000 to 2000 airmen were killed because of flatulence. The reason is B-17 bombers were not pressurized, so when bomber crews operated around 20,000 feet, the gas would expand and rupture their intestines." Now, that is a nasty way to go! There are also, of course, (in)famous stories about excessive farters that bio-hazard small toilet rooms, and when they try to light a cigarette the flame ignites the gas-rich-environment causing an explosion. My personal view about such stories is one of doubt. When you smoke and you fart does it make it smell any worse? (Brittney) Only if you swallow the cigarettes after smoking Brittney. If you settle for traditional smoking (inhaling) - the smoke will travel to your respiratory system and not to your digestive system and hence will have little-to-no effect on the odour of your farts. Of course, a minute mass of smoked Nicotine can (and does) migrate from the respiratory system into blood vessels and downstream to the digestive system (Nicotine is actually a known laxative), but the proportions are too small to contribute dearly to the odours you contribute. However, if you do swallow your cigarettes after smoking - its a different ball game. Cigarettes are produced with measures of Ammonia which certainly intensify gaseous odours. My advise for you therefore is not to swallow. I am guessing the reason why certain people think cigarettes might intensify the bad smell of a fart has to do with the fact both farts and cigarettes produce bad odours. I don't think however that this is a case of competing bad odours that in blend will create a third - even worst odour. Last, while I do not advise you to ever quit farting - I do strongly advise to quit smoking. Can excessive farting cause impotence? That depends on the tolerance level of the person with whom one is trying to be potent! Fortunately for humans, farting doesn't cause tissue damage. Other animals aren't so lucky. Soldier termites can actually turn themselves into bombs by detonating themselves via the explosive release of gas and feces, a process called "autothysis." Is it possible to inhale (suck in air) via one's anal opening? Yes, but it's a rare talent. The great early 20th Century French flatulist, Le Petomane, was able to do this, and in fact was able to suck up an entire bowlful of water (just the water, not the bowl) into his colon and expel it again with considerable force. By sucking in large quantities of air, he was able to perform lengthy shows on stage, and could imitate musical instruments, farm animals, and bird songs, whistle melodies, and play the ocarina. His productions were said to be virtually odorless, which is to be expected from air obtained directly from the outside. Here is a message I received recently (November, 1999) regarding the skill of inhaling via the anus: "i would just like you to know that i am part of a trio, who can suck in air in our anal openings. we are somewhat air-bandits. we can let the longest farts you have ever heard. our record holder, chad, stands at 24 sec. the record for most farts in a row is derek, at 492. and i, robert, have earned such nicknames as: Mad Crapper, gurglemeister, and old wetful. We have followed Le Petomane example, and have mastered the art of farting." Jason W. says, "I am a 16 year old guy that is a part of a 3-man fart on command group. We get together every Saturday night andpractice our talent to songs with a good beat. We accomplish this by getting on our hands and knees, completely relaxing, and our butt hole just opens up and air just seeps into our colons. We then get into position and let them rip. We can so far play a song called "THE EYE OF THE TIGER" (Rocky 3 theme song). We came across another group of 4 guys that can do this during the winter of 2001. We started to get together with them more frequently, and now we have a full fledged band going all on farting...We are going to try to make a CD on some songs we know, but no one wants to let us...I personally have let a fart go for about 75 seconds. On average each Saturday night we let off about 1000 farts EACH! The only problem with flatulating when we want is that now 2 of us can't help but sucking in air through our anus when we sit down." Jason has also provided the following instructions for people who would like to acquire this skill: 1) Get a pillow and a soft surface. 2) Place your ear on the pillow with your head turned sideways. 3) Put your butt up in the air, bringing your knees as close up to your head as possible. This relaxes your anal opening. 4) Once you're relaxed enough, you should feel a strange sensation...this is air traveling into your colon. 5) Through practice you will be able to do this by just sitting down. Adam reports that a student at his high school, known as "The King" could fart "God Save the Queen" by alternately inhaling and exhaling through his anus. The students refered to the inhaling process as "input." Is it possible to swallow smoke and then fart it out your anus? No, smoke consists of solid particles suspended in air. When such a mixture enters the digestive system, the solids condense on the walls and other objects in the gut, or go into suspension in liquids in the system. However, for people capable of inhaling through the anus, it is possible to smoke a cigarette with the anal opening and then blow the smoke back out. What causes the burning sensation that sometimes accompanies a fart? This is generally caused by a recent meal of hot peppers or related spices. The oils associated with these foods remain intact and active all the way through one's gastrointestinal system. If you fart in the bathtub, is the water polluted and should you refill the tub? As long as what comes out is only fart and no poop, your bath water should not be significantly polluted. Most of the gas just bubbles up and contaminates the air rather than the water. Is it true that a woman can fart out of her, shall we say, frontal opening, and if so, where does the gas come from? Yes, it is true! The gas that emerges is simply trapped air, for there is no gas production in the genitalia of a woman. The air can enter because the system is open to the outside. This highly specialized kind of fart is sometimes called a queef. This occurs especially frequently during the sex act, when air in the genitalia gets compressed and is forced out at high pressure. Can a man fart out of his genital opening? I have asked various men this question and they all deny it emphatically. However, elrondh contributed the information that under certain rare and artificially-induced circumstances, a man might pass gas through his penis. In this case, the man's bladder had been inflated for a medical procedure, the air introduced via catheter inserted through the urethra. This gas escaped during later attempts to urinate, "accompanied by a brief but sharp burning sensation." Is it possible to capture a fart in a jar and save it for later use? It should be theoretically possible to do this, but there would be lots of logistical problems. I would suggest using a plastic bag instead of a jar. You might try the following as a science fair experiment: Fart into several plastic bags and seal them carefully. Then fill several other plastic bags with ordinary air. Wait 24 hours. Then get volunteers to smell the contents of the bags to see if they can correctly identify which ones contain the farts. This should tell you if it is possible to store a fart in any useful way. Malachi and Megaera have come up with a way to capture a fart in a jar. They say to do it in the bathtub while bathing. Fill the jar with bath water and then hold it with the open end downward. Lean back in the bathtub so that your fart bubbles will emerge in front of you rather than behind you where you can't see them. Catch the bubbles in the jar, and put the lid on the jar while it's still underwater. This way, you capture a fairly pure fart uncontaminated by atmospheric air. To enjoy your captured fart to the fullest extent, make sure that your jar does not already smell like whatever was it it before, like pickles or peanut butter. Meep wrote to say that her fiancé was an expert fart collector at the age of ten. He used Kodak film canisters, and kept them on a shelf in his room. Experiments on his mother proved the efficacy of his method. Is it weird to enjoy farting? It is not unusual to enjoy farting. I believe that enjoyment of farting is a healthy attitude, since everyone has to fart. If a person is farting to the extent that it creates problems and unhappiness, then a visit to a doctor is in order. Is it common for people to enjoy smelling their own farts? I believe that it is not only common, it is universal. A person farts and then thinks, at least subconsciously, "Wow, I made that!" Can farting be considered sexy? Everything imaginable, and many things not imaginable, can be considered sexy by humans. However, the female southern pine beetle exudes a pheromone called frontalin in her flatulence that not only serves to attract males but acts as a general gathering call to both males and females of her species. Her farts are an invitation to an orgy. Unfortunately for her, her frontalin-laden farts also attract predators. What color is a fart? Farts are, alas, colorless. All of the gases that make up farts have no inherent color. But just think of how interesting it would be if farts were bright orange like nitrogen dioxide gas! It would certainly take the mystery out of who farted. Never-the-less, a high-personality gas like fart gas suggests color to people. Some people envision farts as brown, others as green or yellow. I have always thought of farts as brown, presumably because poop is brown. When someone farts in our car, that person might say, "You better not breathe through your mouth for awhile, or your teeth will turn brown." I knew a toddler who used to draw pictures of farts as yellow rectangles full of holes, like a slice of Swiss cheese. She thought of farts as yellow, and said that she knew they were rectangular because she could feel the sharp corners scraping against her on the way out! Ernie C. suggests that if farts were visible, they would look like pork rinds. Helen says, "It always seemed to me like farts were lumps of coal, black in color and irregularly spherical in shape." Do other people smell a fart better than the farter? The fart should smell just as much for the person who created it as it does for other people. However, the farter is somewhat protected by having the fart propelled away from his body in a direction opposite to his nose. Farting upwind nullifies this advantage. Why is it that when you scratch your *** through two layers of clothing (your underwear and your jeans) your fingers still stink? As pointed out by Barb F., who contributed the term to the fart thesaurus, a fart can be regarded as "aerosolized poop," which means that microscopic fragments and droplets of poop are actually distributed throughout the gaseous matrix of the fart. When delivered from the anus with some force, the components of the fart can penetrate one's clothing and these tiny particles can be trapped in the fibers of the cloth. The particles are transferred to your fingers and then your nose when you scratch and sniff. Why is it sometimes possible to taste farts? The sense of taste detects substances that are either liquid or dissolved in liquid. You can taste a fart when the fart's constituent molecules go into solution in your saliva. Do fart particles disperse in the air and float around until they hit something and then stick to it? The ultimate fate of fart particles depends on the nature of the particles. Gas molecules mostly mix into the atmosphere, although some may react chemically to form new substances. Aerosolized particles of liquid and solid poop probably do condense on surfaces. Most of these particles are polar (with a positively charged end and a negatively charged end) and are attracted to other polar substances or charged surfaces like a monitor screen. Other fart particles condense on microscopic water droplets in the air if the humidity is very high (as in a bathroom), and some particles go into solution in water. Is it possible to have bloody farts? Yes, this can happen if you are suffering from an anal fissure, a split in the wall of the colon. It can also happen to a woman who experiences a queef during her period. Why do farts seem to follow the farter? I'm sure that everyone has experienced this phenomenon, in which one delivers oneself forth of a silent but potent gaseous emission and then steps rapidly away, only to have the fart cling to one's person. Part of the reason for this annoying characteristic of farts is the turbulence that follows in the wake of a moving person. The fart "slip streams" or is actually pulled along in the farter's direction by the air currents behind the person. Another factor is that part of the fart is caught in the farter's clothing, and diffuses out slowly after the main part of the emission has dispersed. Why do farts smell so much worse in a shower than anywhere else? There are several factors. First of all, a shower is a small, enclosed space, so the fart gas is more concentrated, and the high turbidity of the air in the shower circulates the gas through the space effectively. Secondly, the high humidity and high temperature conditions in the shower enhance a person's sense of smell and taste. The farts don't actually smell worse, it's just that we can smell them better than usual. Similar conditions prevail in the bathtub. What would happen if someone farted on Venus? If Venus's surface temperature were a mere 200 to 300 degrees Fahrenheit, liquid water could exist there because of Venus's extremely high atmospheric pressure. But the temperature on Venus is almost 900 degrees Fahrenheit. Because humans are mostly water, a person would not simply emit gas on Venus, but would become gas, a whole-body fart. Venus already has a lot of sulfur compounds in its atmosphere, so a fart on Venus probably wouldn't even produce much of a smell. If you were in space without a suit, would a fart have the energy to propel you forward? Yes, a fart should propel you forward, since there is virtually no opposing force in the form of friction or gravity to counteract the force of the fart. Is it possible to freeze farts, and would they still be smelly after they are defrosted? The water vapor component of farts would freeze quite readily, but to freeze the entire fart would require high pressure and low temperature conditions such as that used to produce dry ice. The fart's composition would be unchanged by the process, and hence would still be smelly upon reversion to the gaseous state. Is it possible for a fart to rip your underwear? This is unlikely, because most underwear is made of material with a fairly high tensile strength, meaning that it can endure a certain level of extensional stress without brittle failure. Furthermore, the porous nature of underwear fabrics allows much of the fart's force to pass through the spaces rather than to stress the fabric. Where does the word "fart" come from? According to Eric Partridge in his excellent book of word origins (Origins: A Short Etymological Dictionary of Modern English), our word fart comes from the Old English word feortan, presumably of echoic origin, meaning that the word was chosen to sound like the object named. When it is cold outside and you fart, can you see it like you can see your breath? Now, that's an interesting idea! My guess would be yes, since farts are nice and moist like our breath, but this is one question that I'm not in a position to answer. I live in the tropics, and it never gets cold here. Several people have tried the experiment and have written to tell me the results. Most people said that they could indeed see their farts, but one person said that he couldn't see it even with his pants off. Here is what anywhere32 reported: "In the boys' locker room after morning water polo practice it was cold out and one of the players only had on his speedo and let out a fart. About four of us saw it and couldn't contain our laughter for the rest of the day." John of the UK said, "Farts expelled in cold air leave what can only be described as a long bushy tail. This is quite funny waiting on a train station platform on a cold dark frosty morning. A person will move away from everyone to a safe distance, and then release a long quiet fart, only to have a sudden and dramatic long bushy white tail coming from their anus; it goes down a little way and slowly curves up ending in a point, just like a dogs tail!" What are some other words for fart? The word "fart" is both a noun (referring to the substance and the sound), and a verb (referring to the act of farting). i seriously have no idea how this was posted as r & s!!!! but i hope u enjoy it as wierd as it is! i just copied and pasted it!! i thought it was funny