The porn section joke is even more valid.

https://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2004/10/29/hoochie-coochie-man

Hah… Adult supervision = benign neglect.

And see what I found!

I had a Turkish exchange student at my uni in Norway, and when he saw a bag of “Turkish Pepper” he was like WTF is this?

End of story he did not appreciate the delicious treats named for his people.

We talk about the vodka belt and potato Europe, but what should we name Nordic/north German and Dutch areas that like salty licorice?

A scene that would have gone viral was when were 12 four of us pooled our money and bought a display box of the rolls.

What commenced was an conveyer belt style production of the things. Being total idiots we had no real idea what we were doing so we taped together several cylinders and while one packed the rest folded. The “packer” used that back end of a fork to get the stuff real tight in the cylinder and since he was sitting with it between his legs in the crotch area he started simulating masturbation with the fork as an attempt to amuse. (Did I mention we were 12 AND idiots?)

What happens was that the friction of cource ignites the damn thing. Luckily it was early in the production so he did not set of much. What happened was teared jeans, some spectacular brucing and a visit to the emergency room. No permanent damage.

The thing is I still work with explosives in a professional capacity and I found that these things are still being sold… P1 pyrotechnic articles, “low hazard” so its still not to late to go viral…

To all the “hammer people”. What you do is you fold it lengthwise down the middle (opening each “dot”) and then carefully pack several rolls into a cylinder. Let say the plastic cylinder these things came in. Then use electrical tape and tape it good and tight. Preferably several cylinders. Remember to put in a fuse. A rubber band clipped open will work in lieu of a proper fuse.

These things blows like flash bangers

This is why the concept of statistical outlier and standard deviation exists.

Had I seen something like this in any analysis I would either assume some fault in the measurement (either reading or technical) or error in punching the data. Then ignored the result if it couldn’t be reproduced, but leave it in the raw data/graph/figure and explain the exlution.