They're running out of distractions. Perhaps we'll start paying attention to actual news?

Maybe it was a snow-laden flying saucer performing cattle mutilations...

Journalism, more useless then an English Major degree!

In all fairness, that record is bullshiat.

Well, ya gotta admit that "Google doodle" is a fun thing to say.

Not really since I don't consider LA Time Blogs a source of news.

Thats why the only worthwhile news source for me is Buzz Burbank.

OlieFan37: Thats why the only worthwhile news source for me is Buzz Burbank.

"And now, from beautiful downtown Burbank..."

What the hell does LA know about snow anyway?

Rufus Lee King: Well, ya gotta admit that "Google doodle" is a fun thing to say.

For some reason, "pool noodle" made me break into a spontaneous giggle git for a half an hour once.

/pool noodle

It's a good thing they see fit to cover the really important things. I would really hate to wake up to news of the protester beat down. Had to see it on RT this morning. Even Fark falls down on the job. Is Drew being paid off or have we decided to let the enslavement continue unabated and unreported.


Must have missed that memo.

GBB: For some reason, "pool noodle" made me break into a spontaneous giggle git for a half an hour once.

It really is a whole lot of bullshiat. Google is testing their meme creating powers.

Could this be the large snowflake in question? What??? C'mon, she is someone's snowflake... right? RIGHT???

Donnchadha: I found it amusing that when you clicked on said doodle, the top google searches for "World's Largest Snoflake" only turned up stories about the Google Doodle of the world's largest snoflake and no actual deatils of said snowflake.

This was exactly my experience. I appreciate this link just because I finally found out about the alleged snowflake.

Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?)

Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

subaudio: Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?)

Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

I caught that too, I'm not sure but I think it is related to surface area rather than a difference in mass.

subaudio: Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?)

Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

Sort of. (new window)

subaudio: Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?)

Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

Sort of. You drop a ball of lead and a ball of rubber bands, they fall at the same rate. You drop a wadded-up ball of paper and a flat piece of paper, and the ball will drop faster. It's not gravity related, though. It's because the flat piece of paper is going to get blown around by wind or air currents. In a vacuum, both would drop at the same rate.

A bigger clump of snow isn't going to be blown around like a single snowflake would be. The clump will fall straight to the ground.

Tommy could explain it all (he's linked in the article).

subaudio: Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?) Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

In a vacuum they might fall at the same rate. But imagine dropping a snowball off the roof on a snowy day- is it going to flutter lightly down to the ground at the same speed as the flakes? No.

I find this article's argument shallow and pedantic.
No, seriously...

Uchiha_Cycliste: I find this article's argument shallow and pedantic.
No, seriously...

Vantango84: In all fairness, that record is bullshiat.

Agreed. I have no problem with the LA Times pointing that out.

Rufus Lee King: Uchiha_Cycliste: I find this article's argument shallow and pedantic.
No, seriously...

[www.popcrunch.com image 431x500]

Bob's not looking so good.

TripcodeMel: subaudio: Why would the speed of descent increase for a larger snowflake (as the article claims?)

Didn't Galileo sort of disprove that notion?

Sort of. You drop a ball of lead and a ball of rubber bands, they fall at the same rate. You drop a wadded-up ball of paper and a flat piece of paper, and the ball will drop faster. It's not gravity related, though. It's because the flat piece of paper is going to get blown around by wind or air currents. In a vacuum, both would drop at the same rate.

A bigger clump of snow isn't going to be blown around like a single snowflake would be. The clump will fall straight to the ground.

It's not just air currents. Even in completely still air, wind resistance (although maybe "air resistance" would be better) will cause all objects to fall more slowly. Objects with low density/large surface area will be slowed the most. A simple example is a dude with a parachute. He presents a large surface area to take advantage of this phenomenon, and in air falls very slowly indeed.

Hmmm?

The Los Angeles Times having an issue with someone's accuracy?

Really?

LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! LOL! .....