Wednesday, September 15, 2004

About "PutASockInIt"...

Re.verbal diahorrea, I beg to differ. There is, too, an old wive's cure for it, and I believe it's extremely efficacious to boot. It's the sock-in-mouth cure, and the older and smellier the sock, the better it works. Not pretty, I agree, but effective.

As to the English language being quirky, m'dear, even a week-old marmite sammich has more quirk per centimetre. Not to mention runny marmalade. However, I digress.

As you have so graciously suggested that I may be properly salted and peppered as far as bloGGz go, I shall let that bit about the bulls go. Or perhaps not.

Re. the bulls, then. It depends on what sort you meant. Istanbulls? Picasso's bulls? El Toro types from Pamplona? With a gored and bloodied matador impaled on a sharpened horn?

They say it's true, bulls DON'T see red. And since you asked...it's a fact that they only see black, white and grey. It's the movement of the matador's cape that gets them.

No, I'm not done yet; you asked the question, now listen to the answer. Why bulls don't see red: the colour-sensitive cells on the retina at the back of the eye are called cones. Cones have a higher stimulus threshold, which really means they like being tickled and also need more light stimulation than the black-grey-white-sensitive cells called rods. Fancy that.

You admitted to seeing red. Therefore we may safely surmise that your cones are in perfect tick and you are not a bull. I am relieved; this makes it amply clear that you're not likely to come charging out of your corner, snorting and pawing at the ground with your hooves, and burying your horns in my gut. Ole!

Next time, let's just talk bullshit.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home