Tuesday, July 28, 2015

If Surfers Were Insects

If you watched the news a few days ago, you may have seen the story about the surfer who was attacked by a shark on national television.  Mick Fanning was not bitten but it was damned close. The shark severed the leash that tethers him to his surfboard.  As might you might imagine, he was a bit shaken up by the incident but he has already returned to the water.

So, once again, the world gets its underwear collectively knotted up and discusses how aggressive a hunter sharks can be and how they are soooooo efficient as a predator.

Ladies and gentleman, ounce for ounce, statistic for statistic, dragonflies make sharks look like novices.

Don't get me wrong:  sharks can delivery devastating injuries. But they have to get you first.  Statistics have shown that they miss their intended target more than half of the time.  While that is certainly better than a lion on the African plains (who miss...alot), they just don't bag dinner as often as one might be led to believe.

Dragonflies, on the other hand, rarely miss.  Statistics have shown that they catch their intended prey 90-95% of the time. For all intents and purposes, they don't miss.  It has been demonstrated that they are able to more or less concentrate on a single prey item among a swarm of potential prey items (as opposed to other animals that are easily distracted by outside forces (like Republicans)). Once a target has been identified, a quick swoop and a grab with a net, if you will, of its six legs, and the prey is secure.  Launch.  Grab.  Munch.  Once a minute.  That's pretty damned good.

I photographed the dragonfly in the above photo at Hayes State Park near Jackson last weekend. Each time it returned, I could literally see the jaws moving as it devoured a little prey item.  

If surfers where tiny insects in a meadow, Mr. Fanning would never have lived to tell his tale.  In fact, every surfer in the entire competition would have been dragonfly chow. 


Yeah, woop-dee-do. 

Tuesday, July 7, 2015

Oooooohs and Aaaaaaaahhhhhhssss (2015)

The tradition continues - Trenton fireworks on the 4th of July. Natalie and I (at least) head to the secret spot on Grosse Ile to watch the show.  This year, it was just the two us with Sue (Nat's mom).  Like last year's show, it was pretty impressive and a far cry  from what I remember as a kid watching the city's show.

This year was a bit different.  It was the first real photo session with my new lens. Sure, I could have put some money into retirement, credit cards, tuition or some other worthy assignment but I secured quite a deal.  I  really needed this lens. No really.  I neeeeeeeded it as I didn't have a mid-range lens.  

I managed the Canon 24-105mm f/4 L IS lens.  Fancy, huh?  Almost as neat as the fireworks themselves.  In fact, there are three neat parts.  IS stands for "internally stabilized."  That scores me the chance to get sharp images with slower shutter speeds as the components in the lens literally shift to keep the image focused on the camera's sensor.  Generally, the slower the speed, the better your chances of walking away with a blurry image as the camera is not motionless.  This feature was turned off, by the way, for the fireworks as the camera was a on tripod (basically the ultimate stabilization) but it is will be great feature when I'm hand-holding the lens.

The second neat neat part is the f/4 reference.  This lens is a prime lens.  For many zoom lens, as you "zoom in", your aperture gets smaller. That's a problem because you are letting in less light. With this lens, I can shoot at f/4 and stay at that aperture all the way to 105mm. Pretty nifty.  

The third neat part is the "L."  That is Canon's way of saying "high quality glass."  While the downsized photos on this dump blog might not show it, the images are really quite sharp.  I'm diggin' it.

Anyhow, below are some pics. Enjoy!!!

Friday, June 19, 2015

The Fibula Fib

A few days ago, Dave Grohl, the singer and guitar player for the mega-band Foo Fighters, took a spill off the stage during a concert.  Falling into the security zone that separates the crowd from the band, his leg broke. Specifically, it was his fibula.  He later had the EMT hold his temporarily bandaged leg so he could finish the show.  A cast and six screws were added later.  The image below is the x-ray of Grohl's leg that he released on Twitter.

Interestingly, he knew right away he broke his leg. In fact, with his image projected on the concert's jumbo screen, he admitted to a stadium packed with thousands of fans that he "...really broke..." his leg.  

He knew immediately.  

So, lets go back in time. Specifically, the evening of April 15, 1865.  There was a show.  A shot.  A slump.  A jump.  An actor limping across the stage to his get away horse.

But did it really happen that way?

No one can dispute the fact that John Wilkes Booth, in a most cowardly fashion, plowed a lead ball into the back of Abraham Lincoln's noggin.  After all, Booth admitted it and thought it was the coolest thing he had ever done.  As we have all heard since childhood, he  broke his leg jumping from the Presidential Suite to the stage below in the middle of Our American Cousin.  We all know he broke his leg. After all, Dr. Sam Mudd tended to it a few days later.  

But did he break it jumping onto the stage after the fatal shot?  Are we sure?

In a word, no.

When all else fails, consult two things: witnesses and science.

Booth is not necessarily a reliable witness. As an actor, he had a flair for stories.  Yes, he was there but he apparently lied about the event.  His own journal entries have him yelling "Sic Semper Tyrannus!" before he shot Lincoln.  That's odd. In a packed theater, no one heard him scream that before he pulled the trigger.  Maybe he was like Brian Williams and blurred the line between confused facts and flat-out bull-puckies.

Booth went on to claim that he broke his leg jumping to the stage, but this is where it gets interesting....

In the grand tradition of murder investigations, there are witnesses that have to be interviewed.  As fate would have it, we still have the testimonies of folks who where there that night.  13 of them make references to Booth "running", "rushing" or "rapidly running" across the stage.  No one makes a reference to pain or a hobbled gait.  No one.

Just for a moment, go back to Grohl.  A scary drop and snap goes the fibula. He immediately knew what occurred. Oh sure, you can talk about Booth's adrenaline or whatnot, but once that fibula goes, the vast majority of people are going to know it. 

If I still don't have your attention, now get this....

Booth's path from the Ford's Theatre to his bullet-through-the-neck death in Maryland is not a mystery.  There were several stops and he met and spoke with several people along the way (not just the aforementioned Dr. Mudd).  There is a distinct lineage of witnesses that state he was in no distress only to be followed by a line of witnesses who say he was an achy son-of-a-bitch.  

John Wilkes Booth

Silas Cobb might be the fulcrum, if you will.  He was the guard on the bridge  to Maryland who conversed with Booth after the assassination.   (Cut the guy some slack here - he did not know Booth had just killed Lincoln as the info had not yet reached him but he knew Booth was the famous actor.) There is NO reference to Booth being in pain. Cobb, however, makes a reference in his testimony that Booth's horse was "restive". That is fancy horse speak for "crotchety pain in the ass."

All witnesses AFTER the bridge report that when they saw Booth he was in pain.  It was noted by John Lloyd at the Surratt Tavern (where he did not dismount - hard to do with a broken leg, huh?) and it was noted by David Herrold, one of Booth's co-conspirators.  

In fact, according to Lloyd, Herrold, and Mudd, Booth told them that he busted his ankle when his finicky horse dumped him.


There you have it.  Booth told at least THREE people that the horse threw him.

Plus, the barn attendants on the Mudd farm stated that Booth's horse had injuries consistent with a fall.  

So where does the science get into this?  The break itself.

After Booth's fatal shooting in the early morning hours of April 26, 1865, an autopsy was done.  The break in his leg was examined.  It is what pathologists call a transverse break.  It snapped like pencil cleanly across the shaft of the bone.

When a individual falls from a height and lands on their feet only to have a long bone break, the break is what is called oblique.  The force downward on the bone snaps it on the diagonal.  The two broken ends are pointed as opposed to the two blunt ends one would find on a transverse break.  

As science has shown repeatedly over the years, the transverse break in John Wilkes Booth's leg is not consistent with a fall from a height and landing on one's feet - it is consistent with a horse falling and rolling on top of the leg as the foot is trapped in the stirrup.  The forces are lateral across the bone, not vertical.  

This brings us back to Dave Grohl. His break is from lateral pressure. It's a transverse fracture.  I know this because I spent three years in Harvard Medical School read alot.  Does this mean he did not fall off a stage? No. 52,000 people saw it happen.   It simply means that I believe he did not land on his feet.  Somehow, someway, in the acrobatics of his fall, there was a lateral force on his leg strong enough to break it.  Had he landed straight down on his feet and broken his leg, the fracture should have been oblique.  Given the force and pointed nature of such a break, a compound fracture of the tibia and/or the fibula was easily possible.  (I recall a story growing up of a fellow falling from a ladder.  The broken leg came out of his knee.  You would expect that, I suspect, with an oblique fracture caused fall from a height.)  

Any way you cut it, transverse or oblique or whatever, Grohl is a very lucky man. Realistically, he could have died had he struck his head.

Booth? Well, he wasn't so lucky.  I'm not sure how much luck one should expect when they assassinate a President. 

I am, however, pretty damned sure of this - Booth's broken fibula following his erratic stage jump is more than likely a fib....

Tuesday, June 9, 2015

One Good Tern Deserves Another

A few nights ago, I managed to sneak out for some time on my own. Nat had other plans so I had time for one of two things: clean the garage or grab my camera and head out for an evening photo shoot. Without sounding harsh, who gives a s*** about a garage, right?

For about two years, I have had thoughts of heading back to Elizabeth Park for an evening Common Tern photo shoot.  The evening portion is key as the setting sun would be at my back. With the colony only a few hundred yards away, they patrol the river in more or less predictable patterns, including the occasional jaunt over the Elizabeth Park Marina where yours truly was  waiting.    

While the flights were certainly there, the numbers were not. If I was a guessing guy, I would say the colony is not doing well this season. I would have expected more fly-bys from more birds. Well, it wasn't to be.  Traffic was, as they say, light. In hindsight, I should have taken my evening photo shoot about a month ago when more birds were around!

Nevertheless, I managed what I think are fair shots.  In fact, in order to keep up with the silly tidbit that is the title of this blog post, I could argue they're good.  Trust me. They are not better than "good" but they'll do.....

Monday, June 8, 2015

Black-Bellied Whistling Ducks

May 20th was just one of those days.

Natalie and I had just finished another outstanding dinner.  With dishes still needing attention but with no motivation to actually do anything about it, I opted to check my emails. 

While I don't recall the exact words, the flow of a particular email was something like this: the previously reported Black-bellied Whistling Ducks were still on the pond.  

A few thoughts crashed through my head. What Black-bellied Whistling Ducks? What report?  What pond?

Well, it turns out that the ducks were on a retention pond only 5.5 from the house. I believe the official address would be Brownstown Township, but for all intents and purposes, it was southern Taylor if that helps you understand where they were.

Looking at this range map, it should be easy for you to understand our excitement....

Yes, folks, that's right. Those ducks had NO business being anywhere near Michigan. 

Natalie and I prioritized our evening.  It was easy to leave the dishes and rocket the 5 miles to Taylor.....

...where we saw nothing. 

Yup. Nothing.  Not a duck to be had.  Other birders were on sight so we continued to poke around and look at other ponds in the area. Nothing.  With our heads hung in defeat, we headed out for the loooonng drive home.  (Not really.  5 miles? Come on....)

As you might expect, it is well worth it to check the pond again.  Sure enough, the following day, reports were coming in of the 14 ducks back on the pond. Immediately after work, Natalie and I shot back there. Don was waiting. So were the ducks.  

In case you're curious, no, I did not get crazy and paint those bills with PhotoShop. That is the natural color.  All in all, Black-bellied Whistling Ducks are hardly difficult to identify.  Bizarre combinations of black, brown, and gray combined with that pink schnoz make for an easy ID.  The fact that they will nest in a hole in tree and stand around on tree branches perfectly explains their name - they don't call 'em tree ducks for nothing!

So where does this put me? Were they life birds? No. I had seen them in Texas multiple times and once in Arizona.  (They were new for Nat, but I am not sure where they stand on her list.)  But lets look at it more locally.  In my life time, my Wayne County List now stands at 284 birds.  My Michigan List now stands at 352.   

You might be wondering about that 284. Is 300 possible?  You bet. Will it be easy? Oh, hell no.  Bird lists are something like bowling averages - the higher the number, the harder it gets to push it higher.  

We'll see where it goes.....