> On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Costentin Cornomorus wrote:
>
> > --- Tristan McLeay <zsau@...> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 25 Jan 2004, Philippe Caquant wrote:
> > >
> > > > There are several colours for blood, but they
> > > are all
> > > > red.
> > >
> > > Even that dried stuff that looks more black
> > > than red? How about the blue
> > > stuff I can see under my skin? or are the veins
> > > blue instead of the blood?
> >
> > Funny how that looks blue from the outside. It's
> > all really pink, white and yellow in there.
> >
> > See
> > <
http://www.people.virginia.edu/~rjh9u/blueblud.html>
>
> Mm... It seems to me (the moreso after reading that) that saying that
> blood under (fair) skin isn't blue, even after reading that, is like
> saying the sky isn't blue.
> After all, if it *looks* blue, why doesn't that
> make it blue? Why shouldn't colors just be ways of discussing what
> something looks like? Maybe an unresolvable issue of semantics...
>
> --
> Tristan
>