Debunking Humor...

Since the election, I no longer have any sense whether stuff like this belongs
on a "Flat Earth" thread, or here in "Debunking Humor" or a new page, just for sobbing...

Screen Shot 2017-02-09 at 9.12.59 PM.png

Fortunately, this was satire...hopefully not to become a real news story in March...

http://www.politicalgarbagechute.com/betsy-devos-flattening-globes/

Reached for comment, Delores Umbridge told the media that she was “quite proud” of her friend Betsy.
Content from External Source
Nice touch.
 
Last edited:


YouTuber Chris Chris captured the above video showing what happens when your camera’s frame rate is perfectly synced to the rotation speed of a helicopter’s rotor: the blades are frozen at the same angles in each frame, making it look like the helicopter is magically floating around with frozen rotor blades.
Content from External Source
This makes for a truely bizarre sight on film, posting it here before people start using it as proof of "holograms" :p

https://petapixel.com/2017/03/04/cameras-frame-rate-synced-helicopters-rotor/
 
Daylight Savings Time (DST)
Finally, all the clocks on my father's appliances are now correct, because he didn't know how to adjust them 6 months ago.
 
ok MB programmers please check this fun fact claim tho from what i can gleam its pretty much right

:eek:

Mind. Blown.

Actually, Douglas Adams totally denied that there was any significance to "42" at all. (It's also 101010 in binary, which some people thought was relevant.)

From the man himself, on a Usenet post in 1993:


The answer to this is very simple. It was a joke. It had to be a number, an
ordinary, smallish number, and I chose that one. Binary representations,
base thirteen, Tibetan monks are all complete nonsense. I sat at my desk,
stared into the garden and thought '42 will do' I typed it out. End of story.

Best,

Douglas Adams
Content from External Source
 
Actually, Douglas Adams totally denied that there was any significance to "42" at all. (It's also 101010 in binary, which some people thought was relevant.)

From the man himself, on a Usenet post in 1993:


The answer to this is very simple. It was a joke. It had to be a number, an
ordinary, smallish number, and I chose that one. Binary representations,
base thirteen, Tibetan monks are all complete nonsense. I sat at my desk,
stared into the garden and thought '42 will do' I typed it out. End of story.

Best,

Douglas Adams
Content from External Source

However, it is not an accident that the numeric values (a=1, b=2, etc.) of xkcd add up to 42.
 
I prefer the binary for 42, 101010, or "yes, no, yes, no, yes, no" - while not intentional, it's an amusing answer to life (yes, no), the universe (yes, no) and everything (yes, no).
 
I prefer the binary for 42, 101010, or "yes, no, yes, no, yes, no" - while not intentional, it's an amusing answer to life (yes, no), the universe (yes, no) and everything (yes, no).
Of course, in the books, the Ultimate Question was revealed to be "What do you get when you multiply six by nine?".

(This does equal 42 in base 13, just another coincidence, hence Adams's comment in the post I linked above)
 
Back
Top