Originally posted by Frank BurnsYou're a mile wrong. I googled Camilla Parker Windsor, nee Shand, otherwise known as Bowles. But she's still alive too!! 🙁
At first that upset me because I thought you were talking about Great Big Stees.
I am relieved to see he is still posting.
Actually, I may be in the wrong thread. She looks more like a horse than a dog... but minimal difference in the jawline! 😀
Originally posted by mikelomDog v. horse
You're a mile wrong. I googled Camilla Parker Windsor, nee Shand, otherwise known as Bowles. But she's still alive too!! 🙁
Actually, I may be in the wrong thread. She looks more like a horse than a dog... but minimal difference in the jawline! 😀
Canuck v. Brit
See Mike, there is a big difference.
Originally posted by PhlabibitIsn't that an average? I seem to remember that when younger they age slower and as they get older the aging process accelerates. But it seems to be a good rule of thumb.
It's a ratio of 7 to 1 for dog years... though I now see some Sciencetit says there is a better formula.
http://www.onlineconversion.com/dogyears.htm
Disregarding dog years, small dogs will live near 15-19 years while Huge Dogs live 9-11.
P-
Originally posted by Frank BurnsWell hello Frank!
Isn't that an average? I seem to remember that when younger they age slower and as they get older the aging process accelerates. But it seems to be a good rule of thumb.
Not sure it's an exact science. I did find a "dog age calculator" that was doing the basics of your formula.
P-
Originally posted by mikelomwell, Prince Charles seems quite enamoured 😛
You're a mile wrong. I googled Camilla Parker Windsor, nee Shand, otherwise known as Bowles. But she's still alive too!! 🙁
Actually, I may be in the wrong thread. She looks more like a horse than a dog... but minimal difference in the jawline! 😀
http://www.springerlink.com/content/u81w0th741113315/
Camillagate: Prince Charles and the Tampon Scandal
JournalSex Roles
PublisherSpringer Netherlands
ISSN0360-0025 (Print) 1573-2762 (Online)
IssueVolume 54, Numbers 5-6 / March, 2006
CategoryOriginal Article
DOI10.1007/s11199-006-9004-4
Pages347-351
Subject CollectionBehavioral Science
SpringerLink DateTuesday, October 03, 2006
David Linton1 Contact Information
(1) Humanities Division, Marymount Manhattan College, 221 East 71st Street, New York, NY 10021, USA
Published online: 3 October 2006
Abstract In 1993 a magazine published the transcript of a telephone conversation between Prince Charles, heir to the British crown, and his lover in which the couple made joking references to tampons in an erotic context. The story quickly spread around the world and became a source of embarrassment for Charles and the Royal family. This article reviews the media coverage of the story and discusses what it suggests about attitudes toward menstruation and men's references to it.
Keywords Menstruation - Tampons - Prince Charles
Contact InformationDavid Linton
Email: dlinton@mmm.edu