Yes, it's another round of that classic guessing game - Animal, Vegetable, Mineral, Abstract [or any combination thereof]. This effort - '03/'04 should address any queries, but then again, may just serve to confuse and baffle which some might say is the point of the game. Patience, integrity and a decent search engine may be useful ....
CdM has it! Streptococcus pneumoniae it is. Take this very small baton along with the Mrs Joyful prize for raffia work and look smug over there while the audience applauds.
Well, that technically wasn't quite a lurker's victory, because I did ask one previous question. But I have been basically absent here for a long time and have almost forgotten how to play this game. Let's go for an ABSTRACT with ANIMAL AND MINERAL CONNECTIONS.
Well-known phrase or saying? The words on the card make up a 12-word phrase (including the definite article) that is certainly not a well-known phrase or saying. However, I will also accept other shorter and more familiar phrases (the most common of which is five words long, including the definite article). That said, the point of the answer is not that it is a well-known phrase, if you see what I mean. Mineral representation of an animal? *smattering of applause* The mineral piece does include a representation of an animal. Green eye of yellow god? No.
Representative of a person? *some audience applause* Taking this first as a narrow question, following on Raak's question before last, I would now amend my answer to say: Yes, The mineral piece does include a representation of an person. Thinking about the AOTC more generally, it depends a bit on how you interpret the word "representative", but the best answer is No.
Confederasing? No. Art? No. *some laughter from the more cynical members of the audience* Known in 1950? No. *while this answer is indubitably correct, it nonetheless prompts some discussion in the audience*
Trophy or Medal? *applause* The mineral part of the answer is a medal. Local game winner? *laughter* The AOTC is not a winner of an MC game. And I am highly confident that no game-winner here has one of the aforementioned medals.
Scientific achievement? Yes. *some laughter from exactly the same cynics who we’re laughing previously* Bravery? No. New medal for each recipient? Yes. *applause for the question*
Well, technically, my card says "Sverige Riksbank", which is why it has 12 words as advertised, not 13. But, YES, Raak now has a gold baton with his name inscribed on the edge.
Your Royal Highness, members of the Nobel committee, jealous also-rans, ladies and gentlemen. To begin a brief informal sketch of the work that led to this award, consider the topos of Liesenring-Schmethold operators over a symplectic manifold equipped with the Swale cohomology on its cotangent bundle...(contd. p.94)
[d] I think you could say that any geological formation is primarily underground, even Mount Everest. If the question is whether it is entirely underground, the answer is no.
Moving quickly on a geological timescale, pausing only to thank the tectonic forces that fashioned this earth with the odd helping hand from extraterrestrial meteorites, read this carefully-arranged eruption which spells
ABSTRACT (as well as trouble for a few geological theories when it's discovered).
Welcome, welcome to one and all. [DrQ] It's abstract. Really quite abstract. So yes, if only in our minds. [Duj] Not the flat-earthers. [Boo] No Amazons here (with Black Friday coming, that may be a relief) [Raak] Not our twin from the dark side. [Gus] Topical in this epoch, but not relevant.
Lots of good stuff coming now. Both on the right evolutionary branch. [DrQuuxum] If you mean ems, ens and that sort of thing, no. [Raak] No, though in a sense, as you taught us to say, isn't everything?
[Boolbar] No "e" whatever, nothing to do with maths. Look, it begins with "b", it's short (hint: 3 letters), it's not a verb, a noun (notwithstanding a famous phrase in which it gets used as both a noun and a verb),or adjective and I'm regretting having used it. Not enough to give the answer?
Summary: mainly metal (but note the "strictly speaking" concerning the glass question), made now and before 1900 (perhaps predominantly the latter, judging by the audience reaction), can be larger than a toaster, not unique, not naturally occurring, no moving parts, not furniture, not a measuring device, not a kitchen item, not a lamppost.