![\"New](\"https:\/\/images.newscientist.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/02161134\/SEI_211290319.jpg\")
<\/div>Nest: still abandoned<\/h2>\n
Brace yourselves. That abandoned bird\u2019s nest is still seated in the mouth of the large, ancient, carved stone human face hanging high on a wall in the northernmost corner of the outdoor garden known as \u201cMichelangelo\u2019s Cloister\u201d in the National Roman Museum in Rome, reports the University College London (UCL) professor who discovered it while visiting the museum this past April then reported it to a colleague who is the director of one of the Netherlands\u2019s great natural history museums, who visited the National Roman Museum the next day and asked officials if he could remove the nest, saving them the trouble of destroying or discarding it, and bring it back to his museum in Rotterdam to add to a collection of biological curiosities, a request greeted with eager gratitude by two officials of the Rome museum but then refused with operatic rage by a third official who happened upon the scene when the first two officials fetched a ladder for the Dutch museum official to use to climb up and remove the until-then-unnoticed nest from the open mouth of the sculpture and who declared that not a twig, not a pebble, must ever leave his museum.<\/p>\n
You can see a photograph of the offending nest in the Feedback<\/a> of 8 May.<\/p>\n In early June, the UCL professor made a quiet return visit to the National Roman Museum, following which he immediately sent an \u201cIt\u2019s still there\u201d report to Feedback.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Feedback would now, more than ever, enjoy receiving reports from future visitors to Michelangelo\u2019s Cloister to observe whether the empty nest (call it an \u201camuse-bouche\u201d, if you like) is still cuddled in the statue\u2019s mouth.<\/p>\n Reader Ashok Khushalani sends a contribution to Feedback\u2019s collection of inspirationally commendable organisation slogans that, not necessarily obviously to the public, were supplanted, superseded or apparently abandoned (18 May<\/a>). The classic examples are IBM\u2019s \u201cTHINK\u201d and Google\u2019s \u201cDon\u2019t be evil\u201d.<\/p>\n Khushalani mourns the loss, in daily experience, of Burger King\u2019s slogan \u201cHave it your way\u201d. This absence, he suggests, has implications.<\/p>\n If you know of a notable highly touted, now-warehoused, slogan, don\u2019t be evil and keep it to yourself.<\/p>\n Instead, please send it, along with documentation, to \u201cMourning dead slogans\u201d, c\/o Feedback.<\/p>\n Two things \u2013 the North American fascination with rod-shaped items and the human habit of proposing theories then shooting them down \u2013 come together in a study called \u201cSize matters? Penis dissatisfaction and gun ownership in America<\/a>\u201c.<\/p>\n Reader Matthew Hall sent a copy to Feedback.<\/p>\n \u201cTo our knowledge, this is the first study to formally examine the association between penis size and personal gun ownership in America,\u201d write Terrence D. Hill and his colleagues in Texas and Florida. \u201cOur findings fail to support the psychosexual theory of gun ownership.\u201d<\/p>\n The same team, plus or minus two researchers, had at it in 2021 with a related study called \u201cSexual dysfunction and gun ownership in America<\/a>: When hard data meet a limp theory\u201d.<\/p>\n They threw cold water on an often-heated public discussion, saying: \u201cOur key finding is that men experiencing [sexual dysfunction] are no more likely to own guns than men without SD.\u201d<\/p>\n Basta<\/i>, they seemed to say in the earlier paper. This didn\u2019t prevent them from continuing to write about it. Basta<\/i>: \u201cUltimately, these kinds of discussions are counterproductive for society because they distract us from the observable realities of penis dissatisfaction and gun ownership.\u201d<\/p>\n Mention of a celebrity pathologist\u2019s inability to smell smells (12 June<\/a>) aroused reader John Adams to think about his own medical-professional journey:<\/p>\n \u201cRegarding Sir Bernard Spilsbury\u2019s defective sense of smell, as a medical student I was told that this is common amongst pathologists because they are exposed to large quantities of formaldehyde vapour which destroys the olfactory nerves. This was one reason I avoided this speciality, the other being that I like my patients to answer back.\u201d<\/p>\n A similar, though milder, preference for conversation, Feedback is told, leads some people to choose dentistry.<\/p>\n Ideally, the title of a scientific report clearly summarises the whole thing. To encourage this practice, Feedback is compiling a collection called The Title Tells You Everything You Need to Know.<\/p>\n Savour, please, two examples. \u201cMan\u2019s fractured sternum was probably due to snake\u2019s weight when it fell<\/a>\u201d appeared in the British Medical Journal<\/i> in 1997. \u201cExperimental replication shows knives manufactured from frozen human feces do not work<\/a>\u201d graced the Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports<\/i> in 2019.<\/p>\n If you find an equally striking example, please send it, with citation details, to: \u201cTelltale titles\u201d, c\/o Feedback.<\/p>\n Marc Abrahams created the Ig Nobel Prize ceremony and\u00a0co-founded\u00a0the magazine Annals of Improbable Research. Earlier, he worked on unusual ways to use computers. His website is\u00a0<\/em>improbable.com<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n Got a story for Feedback?<\/b><\/p>\n You can send stories to Feedback by email at feedback@newscientist.com<\/a>. Please include your home address. This week\u2019s and past Feedbacks can be seen on our website<\/a>.<\/i><\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\nNot your way<\/h2>\n
A limp theory<\/h2>\n
Sense of smell<\/h2>\n
Telltale titles<\/h2>\n