Slashdot Mirror

It's a hoax. See Snopes

http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.asp

We're playing with chemicals

eating toxic foods

They must have gotten that email forward finally. I got it like 7 years ago.

False.

>> http://www.snopes.com/history/american/hancock.htm

Lol. Meh, it makes for a nice story anyway.

Besides, I do think there has to be SOME small element of truth in it, given how much Hancock had at stake by participating in the revolution (being one of the richest men in the colonies at the time). And he had to have signed it knowing King George would see it.

Ever wonder why your signature is referred to as your "John Hancock"? Take a look at a picture of the Declaration of Independence some day. You'll see that by far the largest, most prominent signature is that of John Hancock. This was not him being arrogant - this was him making sure they knew his name. This was an act of courage on his part.

http://www.snopes.com/history/american/hancock.htm

While I have not seen "Loose Change", nor had the time to read your PDF. Here is another reference guide that pretty much shoots down the idea that a missle was used at the Pentagon:

First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.
-Martin Niemoller

"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars."

"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

or somehow account for approximately 60 tons of missing aircraft debris at the Pentagon.

Huh?

Let's take a step back for a moment:

1. There were dozens upon dozens of eyewitness reports who say that a commercial jetliner was what crashed into the Pentagon. These were all just ordinary people, going about their business in the DC area, some affiliated with government and/or miltary, some not. Of the witnesses who say it "sounded" like a missile (note the word "sounded"): how is that even relevant? I ask because of the obvious: how many of these people even know what a missile "sounds" like? How many people have heard a commercial jetliner just hundreds of feet (and at some point, tens of feet) off the ground travelling at ~400-500mph? And to repeat, many, many, many people reported directly seeing an American Airlines commercial jetliner.

2. All of the "conspiracy" reports talk about how "no wreckage" was found at the scene. That is patently false. There was TONS of Boeing 757 wreckage recovered, in total, from the Pentagon. Ironically, here are even large pieces of 757 wreckage visible in the photos used to try to "prove" there was no wreckage! Not to mention that the air disaster photos picked for the video were no doubt picked because there WAS wreckage.

3. Remains 184 of 189 of the victims aboard flight 77 were identified AT THE SCENE from DNA: http://www.dcmilitary.com/army/stripe/6_48/nationa l_news/12279-1.html

4. The ONLY place I've EVER seen any claims about supposed video from the Sheraton, gas stations, etc., is in the internet flash video. I have seen no reference or proof ANYWHERE else, from ANY source, that videos have supposedly been confiscated "minutes" later by the FBI.

5. Also, stop and think about this: where was the (visible) "wreckage" from the WTC towers? Is the only reason we even believe that commercial planes crashed into the towers is because we were able to see it with our own eyes? And even that isn't enough for the conspiracy theorists: they still claim that the WTC towers were *rigged with explosives*, such that they could be made to fall AFTER jetliners rammed into the buildings!

For a detailed analysis, see:

Detailed analysis of building, crash, and events:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/911_pentagon_7 57_plane_evidence.html
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread79655/pg 1

Article debunking the conspiracy story:
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/august2004/11 0804factsstraight.htm

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.htm

http://anderson.ath.cx:8000/911/pen06.html

Purdue University also did a simulation, with associated report, that approximates what happened to flight 77 that day:

http://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/projects/popescu/p entagonVis_files/pentagonVis2003.mpg
http://www.cs.purdue.edu/cgvlab/projects/popescu/p entagonVis_files/paper_422.pdf

And finally, you might be interested in a test done years ago at Sandia National Laboratory, in which an F-4 was crashed into a concrete wall. Not a 757 and not the Pentagon, but I'd implore you to find any recognizable "wreckage":

http://www.sandia.gov/media/mov_mpg/f_4crash_test_ slow.mpg

it saves money in unemployment payments AND lets them lie about unemployment rates even more than usual.

Sorry but this is bullshit. You may wish to read this link and this for more info.

The "technical" frauds today rely on social engineering. Phishing is a perfect example of social engineering, and many botnets get installed by tricking the user rather than by exploiting a technical security vulnerability.

Nor was Abagnale non-technical. One of his scames was so beautiful that you wish you could admire it, and it was based on manipulating the magnetic ink on a check to put the check-processing infrastructure into an infinite loop. Talk about "float", especially since there was never anything behind the check in the first place. He'd withdraw the money after his victim bank decided "well, hasn't bounced yet, must be good".

Take a look at: http://www.snopes.com/business/taxes/woolworth.asp / That would be a good number to use, it looks real and you won't be using someone else's number.

the quote may be interesting, but it may also be false

You are a fool. There is nothing wrong with the meat used at Taco Bell. Their Beef is perfectly fine (USDA inspected) and they use pretty good quality/lean chicken meat too.

Obviously you wouldn't want to eat there every day of the week and obviously YMMV depending on the individual franchises employees, cleanliness and quality.

Actually as far as fast food restaurants go TB isn't that bad. Lots of fresh vegetables, Corn/Flour Tortilla's (most are not fried), lean chicken is available in many different items, most items can be had "fresca" style, even the cheese and sour cream isnt bad in reasonable amounts.

Just admit you are ignorant for propogating an idiotic urban legend and you are biased and we can all move on from there.

PS, See Snopes.com link for debunking of the "Grade C/D/F Meat" rumor:

http://www.snopes.com/food/prepare/badmeat.asp

That quote appears to be ficticious.

While the sentiment of the quote is good and all, it's also most likly made up. http://www.snopes.com/politics/quotes/tyler.asp

Actually, it's a shitty analogy, but it does get your attention for long enough to look at the real argument:

Those that understand that there is a threat to personal freedom by the simple building of enormous cross-referenced databases already know about echelon. The TFH crowd warned us about the "no such agency" and later about "echelon", both of which were later confirmed, and whose existence has now passed into the realm of common knowledge.

So the response of those people who understand the threat is to say to the rest of the good subjects of King George "See, I told ya so."

And the rest of the good subjects response is consistently "You're a nutball. If this has been going on for years and I didn't notice, why should I care now?"

The period of this political cycle (liberty-repression-liberty...) in this country seems to be about 50-75 years. We're just starting into the hardcore authoritarian portion of the cycle. Next comes overt McCarthyism. Take the "flag burning amendment" as a marker for our official entry into that one.

Enjoy the ride, folks, and, remember--it's going to get a lot worse before it gets better. The good news is that this is nothing new, and this, too shall pass.

What country before ever existed a century & half without a rebellion? & what country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon & pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots & tyrants. It is its natural manure.


According to Jefferson, we're about 30 years overdue. I say we're not quite ready yet, but I think I'll see it in my lifetime.

That story isn't true, and you would do everyone a favor if you didn't propagate it. http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

I'm off topic, but que sera.
It's not true.
Pencils have a problem where the leads can break off and weightlessly float into an eye or nose, or short circuit gear. There was a very nice pen developed, and both USA and Russia used it. But development was funded by a private company.

The point with GM, which you seem to have missed, is that it's an example of how unions cannot prevent jobs from moving overseas by preventing a single individual company from outsourcing. The individual company's customers can simply choose to buy from overseas producers.

Also, I did not and do not claim as fact that unionization is what causes unionized businesses to fail at an increased rate; please read my statements more carefully. However, I would be interested in a counter to that point if you have one. Otherwise please look up "quidquid Latine dictum sit altum viditur".

Mostly you haven't taken care to address my points, so I don't have much in the form of rebuttal. However, I must take issue with a factual error:

No. We have low numbers of people collecting unemployment insurance. The "unemployment rate" does not and has not ever measured the true unemployment rate.

This is a lie told by those who wish to portray a failing economy; it's surprising how many people believe it. Snopes has a decent article at http://www.snopes.com/science/stats/unemploy.htm, and they link to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Here is the off-topic, off-color reference

Gere and the Gerbil/a.

Dancing may not cause cancer... then again it might, seeing as I am dancing the give-gullible-people-head-cancer-dance.

Come off it. Most of this aspartame-is-lethal crap is due to an internet hoax email and a bunch of unscrupulous "alternative therapy practitioners". Your link goes to holisticmed.com! Funny how it's all "energy flow" and "meridians" and "magnetism" and "special chinese herbs" and "homeopathy" until they want to scare someone off something - then they pull out the list of scary chemical names of poisons, because scared people tend not to engage their brain. Hmm.

Methanol is dangerous because it converts to formaldehyde - but it's funny how both are mentioned; sounds twice as scary that way! (oh, was that the point, hmm?)

Even if aspartame does produce formaldehyde it's not in any great quantity - aspartame works by being about 200 times sweeter than sugar, so only a miniscule amount is required. Even those small Equal tablets are largely buffer compound; if they were just pure aspartame they'd be too damn small to handle. And even then only 10% of that is potentially convertible; but there is disagreement as to whether that really is the end product.

The previous post is right. Michael Jackson and SONY share half of the publishing rights to about 250 (or so) Beatles tunes, not counting a few early songs. In the articles I read, Capitol Records or EMI owns the tape reels, masters, etc. There was nothing about Apple Corps, unless Apple Corps is a front for Capitol Records or EMI. It seems that this confusing arrangement arose from bad money choices the Beatles made in the 60's. See Cecil or Snopes on this.

Australia?

Seriously though, hasn't something like this been tried before?

http://www.snopes.com/business/hidden/popcorn.asp

Maybe we *do* need an Internet Cleaning Day!

http://www.snopes.com/holidays/aprilfools/cleaning .asp

Let's keep the debate within the confines of reality. There are no such things as snuff films.

Is there a bumper sticker that says: How do you like my driving? Dial 1-800-EAT-SHIT.

For children posters who might not know, the this is a reference to the JATO urban legend

I love the quote that you reference in your sig, but Lincoln never actually said it. While I strongly agree with the sentiment, it's better, in my opinion, not to support it with inaccurate attributions.

How many generations of people are going to be tainted by the REAL Evil Empire.. Disney... Lemmings don't kill themselves unless some sick twisted film maker is driving them off a cliff...

http://www.snopes.com/disney/films/lemmings.htm

You're a fucking moron.

http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/barcode.as p

Anybody who can point me to some hate campaigns by major companies that seem(ed) to be effective?

Pepsi.

In the early 80s, Pepsi created a series of ads inviting people to "take the Pepsi challenge." In these ads, people took blind taste tests of Pepsi and Coca-Cola, without knowing which was which. Invariably it would be revealed that they had chosen Pepsi over Coke.

These ads were so effective in increasing Pepsi's marketshare that Coca-Cola made the decision to reformulate their flagship product in an attempt to beat Pepsi at their own game.

I thought I'd seen that somewhere before..

Hello everybody,

My name is William Hepburn Russell. I have just written up a pony express tracing program that traces everyone to whom this message is forwarded to. I am experimenting with this and I need your help. Forward this to everyone you know and if it reaches 1000 people everyone on the list will receive $10 at my expense. Enjoy.

Your friend,
William Hepburn Russell

Plenty of Texans will tell you how incredibly proud they are that when the State was admitted to the Union, the State retained both the right to secede (which isn't really true) and the right to subdivide into 5 separate states (which is definitely true, but not unique). While there's always a home-grown movement to secede (it's more of a joke than anything else), occasionally someone floats the idea of subdividing into 5 states. That way, we'd pick up 8 additional senators. As attractive as that notion is to some people, it never gets very far. I think people intuitively realize that 2 powerful senators from a big state can probably accomplish more than 10 senators from 5 average-size states with potentially conflicting interests.

I know we voted for english way back in the day, but that doesn't make publishing in german a crime.

No. This is Nazi propaganda (seriously! - how rare is it that such phrases can be literally said? scroll down about two "page downs" worth).

I know we voted for english way back in the day, but that doesn't make publishing in german a crime.

No. This is Nazi propaganda (seriously! - how rare is it that such phrases can be literally said? scroll down about two "page downs" worth).

I don't see how Nintendo Wii is that much better than the other two. When they go into the store the choice is between 'Made Up Name' 360, 'Made Up Name' 3, and 'Made Up Name'. At least the Playstation gives some indication of what it might do.

It's all about branding. Yes "Xbox" and "Playstation" are all made-up names, but those brands have been around for a while now. Those names might have been silly sounding when they first came out, but so did Google, Yahoo, and eBay. I've heard of too many moms talking about their kids playing Xbox when it's really a Playstation (or vice versa).

What Nintendo really has going for them is the "Nintendo" name itself. They've been associated with games far longer than Microsoft or Sony. My mom still refers to everything video-game related as Nintendo, since I grew up on the NES and SNES. So while "Wii" itself may be a crappy name, most folks (and store clerks) will refer to it as the next video game machine from Nintendo, and that will click with most consumers.

The biggest problem I have with "Wii" is that it has too many negative connotations with existing English words/slang. Reading all of the Slashdot comments makes that obvious. You didn't really have that problem with Xbox or PlayStation or GameCube. It reminds me of the urban legend of the Chevy Nova not selling well in Spanish-speaking countries, since "no va" means "doesn't go". (And yes, I know it's a false urban legend) Still, you would have thought that there were many other names Nintendo could have chosen that didn't have such negative connotations. "Wii" may be fine in Japan and other non-English speaking countries, but the US/UK/Australian populations are huge and it just seems to risky to do.

I can't speak to the others, but for the Nova comment, let's see what Snopes has to say, shall we? In part:

First of all, the phrase "no va" (literally "doesn't go") and the word "nova" are distinct entities with different pronunciations in Spanish: the former is two words and is pronounced with the accent on the second word; the latter is one word with the accent on the first syllable. Assuming that Spanish speakers would naturally see the word "nova" as equivalent to the phrase "no va" and think "Hey, this car doesn't go!" is akin to assuming that English speakers woud spurn a dinette set sold under the name Notable because nobody wants a dinette set that doesn't include a table. ...

The truth is that the Chevrolet Nova's name didn't significantly affect its sales: it sold well in both its primary Spanish-language markets, Mexico and Venezuela. (Its Venezuelan sales figures actually surpassed GM's expectations.) ...

The one bit of supporting evidence offered to back up this legend is spurious as well. General Motors, we're told, finally wised up and changed the model name of their automobile from Nova to Caribe, after which sales of the car "took off." One small problem with this claim: the Caribe sold in Mexico was manufactured by Volkswagen, not General Motors. (The Caribe was the model name used by VW in Mexico for the car more commonly known in the USA as the Volkswagen Golf.) The Nova's model name was never changed for the Spanish-speaking market.

So, I'd say that pretty much does it for that story. I wouldn't be surprised if a couple of the ones you listed were accurate, but I wouldn't be surprised if none of them were either, all things considered.

The "Wii" is still a stupid name, though.

That would be the Chevy Nova. "No va" means "No Go" in spanish.

Actually, the Chevy Nova thing is more of an urban legand.

Not entirely a correct correlation, but "Wii" is a stupid name. How the heck do you ponounce it?

According to TFA, it's pronounced "we". (Which, IMO, really sucks. What was wrong with Revolution?)

This reminds me of a movie where a few students started sending tape-recorders to class instead of themselves. Gradually the scene had the professor lecturing to a room full of tape recorders. The last step in this scenario was a tape of the lecture being played to a room full of machines taping it.
Apparently, it's Real Genius. I have vague memories of that movie... I'm going to have to watch it again one of these days.

STATUS: TRUE

Sigh... http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/frogboil.htm

I thought we already cleaned the internet earlier this month...

Controversial content has been under the spotlight recently after the widespread publicity surrounding an online video of a woman wearing high-heeled shoes stomping a cat to death.

And the REAL story (or at least, more real than the one those letters spell) can be found here.

While Marx's letter makes it sound like Warner Brothers was upset about the use of the word "Casablanca", that's not really how it happened. That's just what Groucho wanted the public to THINK happened.

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

Clearly, although Gore's phrasing was clumsy (and perhaps self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible, in an economic and legislative sense, for fostering the development the technology that we now know as the Internet. To claim that Gore was seriously trying to take credit for the "invention" of the Internet is, frankly, just silly political posturing that arose out of a close presidential campaign. Gore never used the word "invent," and the words "create" and "invent" have distinctly different meanings

Claim: Vice-President Al Gore claimed that he "invented" the Internet.

Status: False.

Origins: Despite the derisive references that continue even today, Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way. The "Al Gore said he 'invented' the Internet" put-downs were misleading, out-of-context distortions of something he said during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN's "Late Edition" program on 9 March 1999. When asked to describe what distinguished him from his challenger for the Democratic presidential nomination, Senator Bill Bradley of New Jersey, Gore replied (in part):

During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system.

Clearly, although Gore's phrasing was clumsy (and perhaps self-serving), he was not claiming that he "invented" the Internet (in the sense of having designed or implemented it), but that he was responsible, in an economic and legislative sense, for fostering the development the technology that we now know as the Internet. To claim that Gore was seriously trying to take credit for the "invention" of the Internet is, frankly, just silly political posturing that arose out of a close presidential campaign. Gore never used the word "invent," and the words "create" and "invent" have distinctly different meanings -- the former is used in the sense of "to bring about" or "to bring into existence" while the latter is generally used to signify the first instance of someone's thinking up or implementing an idea. (To those who say the words "create" and "invent" mean exactly the same thing, we have to ask why, then, the media overwhelmingly and consistently cited Gore as having claimed he "invented" the Internet, even though he never used that word, and transcripts of what he actually said were readily available.)

If President Eisenhower had said in the mid-1960s that he, while President, "created" the Interstate Highway System, we would not have seen dozens and dozens of editorials lampooning him for claiming he "invented" the concept of highways or implying that he personally went out and dug ditches across the country to help build the roadway. Everyone would have understood that Ike meant he was a driving force behind the legislation that created the highway system, and this was the very same concept Al Gore was expressing about himself with his Internet statement.

Whether Gore's statement that he "took the initiative in creating the Internet" is justified is a subject of debate. Any statement about the "creation" or "beginning" of the Internet is difficult to evaluate, because the Internet is not a homogenous entity (it's a collection of computers, networks, protocols, standards, and application programs), nor did it all spring into being at once (the components that comprise the Internet were developed in various places at different times and are continuously being modified, improved, and expanded). Despite a spirited defense of Gore's claim by Vint Cerf (often referred to as the "father of the Internet") in which he stated "that as a Senator and now as Vice President, Gore has made it a point to be as well-informed as possible on technology and issues that surround it," many of the components of today's Internet came into being well before Gore's first term in Congress began in 1977.

It is true, though, that Gore was popularizing the term "information superhighway" in the early 1990s (although he did not, as is often claimed by others, coin the phrase himself) when few people outside academia or the computer/defense industries had heard of the Internet, and he sponsored the 1988 National High-Perf

Danes were good folk in the war years, but the story you allude to didn't happen.