Archive through July 20, 2005 Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Register | Edit Profile

Lateral Puzzles » Solved Lateral Thinking Puzzles » Solved Puzzles - July 2005 » Tick-tock, Tick-tock, Tick {Rabrab} » Archive through July 20, 2005 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 6:23 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Maybe they could use politicains?
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 6:53 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

As meat shields? To thwart terrorists? To protect bomb disposal units? To fertilize the landscape?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 7:17 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Saturday, July 16, 2005 - 06:53 am

As meat shields? To thwart terrorists? To protect bomb disposal units? To fertilize the landscape? Grand suggestions, all of them. Unfortunately, none are right.
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 7:46 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is what the politcians should be used for...
a job?
a function?
an event?
a tool?
a means to an end?
involve using them physically? mentally? emotionally? for their skills?
Does this specifically call for using somebody...
who is skilled at being an adminstrator for the government? skilled at the science of government? skilled at campaigning? skilled at lying? skilled at running things? skilled at negotiating? skilled at telling people what they want to hear?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:22 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 07:46 pm

Is what the politcians should be used for...
a job? No
a function? Yes, for a specific definition of "function"
an event? No.
a tool? No.
a means to an end? Yes, with a small -ish tagging along...
involve using them physically? Yes mentally? No. emotionally? No. for their skills? No.
Does this specifically call for using somebody...
FA, and a very important one.
who is skilled at being an adminstrator for the government? skilled at the science of government? skilled at campaigning? skilled at lying? This one is the reason that politicians might work. skilled at running things? skilled at negotiating? skilled at telling people what they want to hear?
All the others are really irrelevant in light of the FA.
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:47 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Is the notion that "they" might (or do) use some thing (such as a doormat) rather than some person (such as a politician)?
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:49 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

With regards to the FA...
Is the use of a person not required?
Do they not need 'somebody'?

Use politicians as lie detectors?

What I think I know: A politician could physically function as... something... where their lying skills MIGHT come in handy producing results.

This 'something'...
Is something else used currently for the same function? Is it a machine? Is it an animal? vegetable? mineral? a different person? a different occupation?
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 2:25 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Politicians lie in cast-iron sinks?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 2:52 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

David Burn (Woubit) on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:47 pm

Is the notion that "they" might (or do) use some thing (such as a doormat) rather than some person (such as a politician)? Yes-ish... No politicians are actually used.

Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Sunday, July 17, 2005 - 10:49 pm

With regards to the FA...
Is the use of a person not required? Yes.
Do they not need 'somebody'?They do need "somebody", but in a lateral way.

Use politicians as lie detectors? No.

What I think I know: A politician could physically function as... something... Yes where their lying skills MIGHT come in handy producing results. Not produce results, but make them desirable candidates in the first place.

This 'something'...
Is something else used currently for the same function? Yes Is it a machine? Is it an animal? The 'something' actually used? This one. vegetable? mineral? a different person? The 'something' which is implied to be used is this one, a different occupation? And this one, as well.

David Burn (Woubit) on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 02:25 am

Politicians lie in cast-iron sinks? Yes, they do. But I don't think that it's relevant to the puzzle.

A statement was made implying that because a type of person was in short supply something was going undone. "Maybe they could use politicians" was my reaction to the statement.
David Burn (Woubit)
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 3:00 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Hot air? Wind?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 3:42 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

David Burn (Woubit) on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 03:00 am

Hot air? Wind The something else? No.
Lisa (Dlcygnet)
Posted on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 3:48 am:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Tick tock... anything to do with bomb disposal?

The current 'something' being used...
A seal?
A cat?
A dog?
And a police officer?
A fireman?
A rescue person?
Are they a team?
Does this involve sniffing for drugs?
Pulling people out of avalanches?
Guiding the blind?
Verifying bomb threats?
Tracking down perps?
*tries to imagine what else these dog teams do*
Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 3:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was your reply a joke? "To lie" versus "to lie down", ie. a play on words?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 4:42 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lisa (Dlcygnet) on Monday, July 18, 2005 - 03:48 am

Tick tock... anything to do with bomb disposal? No, but the title does have a tortured and tenuous connection to the puzzle.

The current 'something' being used...
A seal?
A cat?
A dog? None of these,
And a police officer?
A fireman?
A rescue person? and neither of these.
Are they a team? No.
Does this involve sniffing for drugs?
Pulling people out of avalanches?
Guiding the blind?
Verifying bomb threats?
Tracking down perps? None of these. It's something the animal is used for, rather than something the animal does itself.


Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu) on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 03:31 pm

Was your reply a joke? "To lie" versus "to lie down", ie. a play on words? Hi, welcome. No, just a mis-spelling. Lay/lie is one of my bugbears.
Haenlomal (Haenlomal)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 5:02 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Was/Were the animal(s) the proverbial guinea pig(s) for some sort of experiment/test?
Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 6:03 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Monkeys, chimps or any primates or apes?
Sophisticated brain research?
Brain research focusing on what goes on in the brain during social situations or communication?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 6:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Haenlomal (Haenlomal) on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 05:02 pm

Was/Were the animal(s) the proverbial guinea pig(s) for some sort of experiment/test? No. The purpose they served was much more basic.

Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu) on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 06:03 pm

Monkeys, chimps or any primates or apes? None of these.
Sophisticated brain research?
Brain research focusing on what goes on in the brain during social situations or communication? No, no research of any type is involved.
Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 6:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

The animals .. a person might be used in stead of the animal?
A single species of animal or more? A type of animal rather than species?

Were the animals used for food? To produce food?
Were they used for any part of their body? Fur?
Were they used for entertainment? As pets?
For a purpose one might consider unusual for the animals in question?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 7:20 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu) on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 06:31 pm

The animals .. a person might be used in stead of the animal? It's physically possible, but unlikely and illegal.
A single species of animal or more? This one. A type of animal rather than species? although there are other species of the same type that could serve the purpose equally well.

Were the animals used for food? YES. To produce food? No.
Were they used for any part of their body? Fur? Yes, as meat.
Were they used for entertainment? As pets? And no to both of these.
For a purpose one might consider unusual for the animals in question? Not at all unusual.
Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 9:44 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Politicians could be used for meat because of their lying skills?
Because of something that causes them to be good liars?
Is that something a body part? Tongue? Can that something be used as food?

Whatever it is that you are saying they're using is used for meat? Or is meat something that is ok for that purpose?
... I'm a little confused. From what you said earlier they I gather that for the purpose they are using animals as meat they are also using "a different person" and "a different occupation"?
Barbara Johannessen Bailey (Rabrab)
Posted on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 10:56 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

Lauri Ahonen (Klaivu) on Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 09:44 pm

Politicians could be used for meat because of their lying skills? No. July 18th 2:52 AM I said that their lying skills make them good candidates for this use. Mostly it's just my cynicism showing...
Because of something that causes them to be good liars? No.
Is that something a body part? Tongue? Can that something be used as food? Just meat in general.


Whatever it is that you are saying they're using is used for meat? Or is meat something that is ok for that purpose?
... I'm a little confused. From what you said earlier they I gather that for the purpose they are using animals as meat they are also using "a different person" and "a different occupation"?

OK, then, how about a sort-out:

There are two types of people involved in the puzzle, and two types of animals.
One of the types of people is "politicians"; the other is as yet unexplored and is relevant.
Neither type of animal has been dicovered.
The two types of animals are both relevant.
One animal is used for food.
My reaction to the original statement was that perhaps politicians could be used instead of the food animal.

The goal of the puzzle: What was the original statement made? What is the actual factual basis of the original statement?

You might want to retreat to some of the SBQ's. Some will be unhelpful, some are vital.
Kapil Kapur (Dinkie)
Posted on Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 2:31 pm:   Edit PostDelete PostView Post/Check IPPrint Post   Move Post (Moderator/Admin Only)Ban Poster IP (Moderator/Admin only)

foxes ?
chickens ?
ostriches ?
lambs ?
pigs ?