Yeah, but how would she breathe? 
Corals are technically animals. They arent the most nimble of jumpers.
Do “millionth” or “billionth” rhyme with month?
No, but “oneth” does. 
It is with the greatest of trepidation that I would point out an error in something Darwin’s Finch has said, but let me try:
The definition of “knee” where it relates to quadrupeds includes the carpal joint. Where an elephant is different is that there’s very little “flexing” in their “elbow” joints when they walk. It’s pretty much all done at the “wrist.” That counts as one set of knees.
In the back legs of most quadrupeds, the main joint bends backwards, which corresponds to the ankle. The “true” back knee is typically located much closer to the body and isn’t very noticeable. In horses and the like it’s called the “stifle.” In elephants, however, the back knee is not located close to the body, and does noticeably flex.
So, an elephant does indeed have four “knees,” as the result of some imprecise, and admittedly unscientific definitions of the word.
And “millionth” and “billionth” probably shouldn’t be considered as rhymes for “month,” since the last accented vowel and succeeding sounds in both the former cases is “illionth.”
According to youreyedoctors.com, as well as the link Darwin’s Finch** provided, our eyes are not the same size from birth to adulthood.
“Imprecise” is right - which is why I said what I did
The knee joint is the joint between the femur and the tibia+fibula, regardless of the tetrapod in question. I doubt you’d find an anatomical text which would say otherwise (even most dictionaries define it as such). Similarly, the elbow is the joint between between humerus and radius+ulna.
The definitions of these joints is not dependent on their being “major” joints, or their relative positions on a limb; rather, the definitions are dependent on which bones articulate with which. Thus, knees only occur in hind limbs.
Granted, some folks may refer informally to any joint that looks like a knee as a knee, but that doesn’t make it an anatomically correct definition.
Hey, not just some folks, but the editors at Merriam-Webster:
Main Entry: 1knee
Pronunciation: 'nE
Function: noun
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English cnEow; akin to Old High German kneo knee, Latin genu, Greek gony
Date: before 12th century
1 a : a joint in the middle part of the human leg that is the articulation between the femur, tibia, and patella; also : the part of the leg that includes this joint b (1) : the joint in the hind leg of a four-footed vertebrate that corresponds to the human knee **(2) : the carpal joint of the foreleg of a four-footed vertebrate **c : the tarsal joint of a bird d : the joint between the femur and tibia of an insect
Allowing that a dictionary is mainly a reflection of usage–not a reference for anatomy–I’d be willing to say that this secondary definition is probably pretty old.
:sigh:
Fine, call it a knee. While we’re at it, we might as well admit that birds aren’t the only animals with feathers, because some yahoo way back in the umpteenth century decided that horses have them too.
No wonder people are confused by anatomy, and even moreso by comparative anatomy.
no, this is a fact in everyone… as part of this syndrome, they were trying to nail down where it came from in the family (this is a genetic syndrome) and since there wasn’t anyone that we could noticebly tell had this, everyone was tested (meaning all my wife’s and my families both). part of the tests were to measure the eyes, nasal cavity, palatte, among several other factors, along with some cat scans… since this test was done on me (about 4 years ago or so) I have had my eyes measured 4 other times (once each year… they think the syndrome came from me). anyway, they have always measured the same.
Not according to x-ray vision’s cite:
Well, it seems clear from the context that you were an adult four years ago (correct me if I’m wrong), so that doesn’t really prove anything one way or the other.
yes but the original factoid stated that your ears and nose never stop growing, so I was assuming that we were either trying to put eyes in that category or not. I don’t think that they conitnue growing, and the fact that I am an adult now (and was 4 years ago, im 27) and that they haven’t grown goes to show that the factoid is true.
The original factoid:
We’ve shown that your eyes are not the same size all through your life. We haven’t really put our teeth into the ears and nose part yet.
good point priceguy… we haven’t discussed ears and nose, and although i don’t have any frame of reference, that sounds perfectly plausible to me, at least I know babies have very small noses and ears, while adults do not, although i don’t know if there is some point where they would stop growing or not…
your cite above seems to suggest that there is a point where your eyes stop growing, and it seems to be very early in childhood…
I am off to try and find some more specific information on it
Great thread! I was hoping to see one “factoid” on the list- that being that the Queen Elizabeth II moves only 6 inches on a gallon of diesel fuel. Seems like it would be easy to disprove for someone knowledgeable about ships so if anyone can shed light on this, please do so.
From the QE2 homepage:
It is a scientific fact that polar bears north of the equator are right-pawed, whereas polar bears from south of the equator are south-pawed. This is because of coriolis force. I thought everyone knew that…
You’re not going to do that on mine. They’re off limits
Damn, I beat down the ear and nose growing myth here a few times, with medical cites.
The short version: Nose cartlidge and ear cartlige may droop over time, giving the appearance that they’ve grown. This is not growth per se, but lengthening through drooping.
Perhaps he/she meant mammals? Even so, what about White Men?