Slashdot Mirror


Darwin Awards 2006

ms1234 writes "The year is coming to and end so it is time to see how our genepool is doing. Darwin Awards 2006 includes everything from whacking RPGs with hammers to recreating experiments by Franklin."

199 comments

  1. Fool me twice... by rancher+dan+3 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Are these real events or made up ones, like in previous years?

    1. Re:Fool me twice... by Elliot_Lin · · Score: 3, Insightful

      They are real. There wouldn't be lots of point honoring a non-existent person for something they hadn't done.

    2. Re:Fool me twice... by DrunkenTerror · · Score: 1

      So where are the actual sources?

    3. Re:Fool me twice... by schon · · Score: 3, Informative

      I'm not sure about the others, but the "Star wars" one happened in early 2005, not 2006 - although whether one person died or not I don't know (last I heard it was just injuries.)

      Slashdot covered it here: http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/24/141225 3

    4. Re:Fool me twice... by crimson30 · · Score: 0

      They are real. There wouldn't be lots of point honoring a non-existent person for something they hadn't done.

      2003 Darwin Awards
      2004 Darwin Awards
      2005 Darwin Awards

      Snopes sounds convincing to me.

      Why do people make things up? To see how many people they can fool, perhaps?

    5. Re:Fool me twice... by El+Torico · · Score: 2, Informative
      Apparently the one about the drowning Pastor is. This is from the World Net Daily of August 30, 2006,

      Pastor Franck Kabele, 35, told his congregation he could repeat the biblical miracle, and he attempted it from a beach in Gabon's capital of Libreville. "He took his congregation to the beach saying he would walk across the Komo estuary, which takes 20 minutes by boat. He walked into the water, which soon passed over his head and he never came back."
      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    6. Re:Fool me twice... by El+Torico · · Score: 1

      Check that; I realized the quality of the source I referred to, so I went back to find a more reputable source. All of the pages I found use the same article and don't refer to a reputable first source.

      --
      In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is usually crucified.
    7. Re:Fool me twice... by lessthan · · Score: 2, Informative

      The article linked is to the Darwin Awards website, which verifies all its winners. the articles you linked are for the chain-mails that make the rounds. why did you do this?

      --
      Space Shuttle was a program that strapped humans to an explosion and tried to stab through the sky with fire and math
    8. Re:Fool me twice... by aj1 · · Score: 1

      I've seen more believable chain letters than many of these articles.

      Let's review

      We have a pastor who wanted to prove to the world he could walk on water and attempts to make the walk to prove this... WITHOUT INVITING ANYONE who obviously knew how to swim. Hey he's supposed to sink first right, and then arise like a submarine surfacing fast?

      Or we have the man who missed his stop, forced open the doors, and leaps from the moving car to his death. Since he didn't talk to anyone I would love to know which psychic aboard knew what he was thinking. Personally, if the story is true (very big if), it sounds more like suicide.

      You have the electrician playing next to power lines. You have references without actual links (good luck finding the story). And the list goes on...

    9. Re:Fool me twice... by crimson30 · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Because I didn't realize there was a difference.

    10. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, the paster story was in various newspapers. Maybe the guy on the train yelled, "Oh shit, I missed my stop!" As for the electrician, I know a very good one with over 30 yrs experience, who whole-heartedly believes its possible to create dynamos (he believes that if you power something, such as a car, with a battery and use said device to recharge the battery, it will run forever).

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    11. Re:Fool me twice... by GrumpySimon · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yeah - this is the problem with these, they sound far too urban-legend-y to be true. The stories do have a "Confirmed True by Darwin" note, but I only counted ONE that backed things up with a link to a newspaper story.

      With things like google news, it's certainly not hard to find five or six million versions of the same article, so until they do this, the Darwin awards are just a collection of mildly funny stories that happened to someone's Aunt's cousin twice removed. ( Seriously - one of them starts with "I am 14, and I know this is a true story..." -- WTF? ).

    12. Re:Fool me twice... by heyitsgogi · · Score: 5, Informative

      From snopes.com: The various "Annual Darwin Awards" e-mails (such as the one which is the topic of this article) do not originate with DarwinAwards.com; they are put together by unknown persons. -- snopes asserts that the website is legit.

      --
      who let a poet in here?
    13. Re:Fool me twice... by GrumpySimon · · Score: 1

      Ok. Make that ONE with a link, and two referencing "BBC News" or "MSNBC.com", i.e. useless.

    14. Re:Fool me twice... by Ikcor · · Score: 1

      > I am 14, and I know for a fact this story is true.

      With attribute such as this, how can you not be sure?

    15. Re:Fool me twice... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      You are right about that. They know the NEC inside and out, but they aren't so strong on the physics side of it usually.

      I spent 15 minutes explaining to electricians how a plasma ball might be sustained (for a little while at least) by 1500amp mains shorting out, but I don't think they ever believed me.

      The question arose because we blew all 3 phases' 1500 amp fuses when we shorted out what appeared to be two phases' busbars. My theory was that the two phases shorting out caused enough sustained plasma (for a few dozen/hundred milliseconds at least) to touch and short out out the third phase's busbar as well as well.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    16. Re:Fool me twice... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Ah, I did seem to recall that that one was older than 2006. Thanks for the link. :)

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    17. Re:Fool me twice... by kirun · · Score: 4, Informative

      You may well have read some article assuming they were the same, there are rather too many "journalists" who get all excited when they think they can steal something off the Internet in place of doing real work. The Darwin Awards aren't the only ones suffering from this problem, the True Stella Awards site often gets listed as the source for the bogus Stella Awards email.

      --
      I'm scared of numbers that can't be written as a fraction. It's an irrational fear.
    18. Re:Fool me twice... by AlHunt · · Score: 1

      >Are these real events or made up ones, like in previous years?

      Whatever else they are, they're not particularly amusing/shocking or well written. Boring and piteous.

      Let's nominate the Darwin Awards an honorary spot this year by virtue of having shot themselves fatally in the foot.

      --
      1 in 4 Maine children in struggle with hunger.
    19. Re:Fool me twice... by PatrickThomson · · Score: 1

      he believes that if you power something, such as a car, with a battery and use said device to recharge the battery, it will run forever

      Nitpick: if the car was electric, then yes, that's retarded. However, this is the norm for petrol or diesel powered cars.

      --
      I am one of many. My idea is not unique, nor do I expect my voice alone to sway you. I speak in a chorus of opinion.
    20. Re:Fool me twice... by drsquare · · Score: 1, Flamebait
      There wouldn't be lots of point honoring a non-existent person for something they hadn't done.

      Tell that to Christians at Easter.
    21. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      who whole-heartedly believes its possible to create dynamos

      Right, because as we all know, dynamos just magically appear out of thin air.
    22. Re:Fool me twice... by minus_273 · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      yeah and to Muslims.. all the time.. crap thats gonna warrant a jihad isnt it?

      --
      The war with islam is a war on the beast
      The war on terror is a war for peace
    23. Re:Fool me twice... by cosmol · · Score: 1

      If they are made up they should be much more entertaining.

      If they are real they should list their sources and specific information. Instead they read like a chain-email, "I am 14 and know this to be true" WTF!

      I agree, Boring and piteous indeed!

    24. Re:Fool me twice... by Nimey · · Score: 1

      Nitpick: batteries degrade after time.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    25. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yes, which is why I said *electric*. By the way, he also believes that if you had a boat with two powerful magnets as opposites ends, it would move without need for power. I cannot convince him that since since they are physically connected (by the boat), that they form a closed system and would not move the boat.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    26. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Right, because as we all know, dynamos just magically appear out of thin air.

      I don't understand your comment. Dynamos can't be made anymore than they could "magically appear."

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    27. Re:Fool me twice... by lgw · · Score: 1

      You keep using that word, but I don't think it means what you think it means. Dynamo means roughly "generator", at least in the context of conversations with electricians. You seems to think it means "perpetual motion machine", which is a usage I've never seen before.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    28. Re:Fool me twice... by CommunistHamster · · Score: 3, Funny

      No, just a fatwa. Don't worry.

    29. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Well, either the usage is different in your part of the world, or it has changed since I took college phsyics (many, many years). Wikipedia seems to agree with you, but when I took physics in college, the professor used "dynamo" to mean a machine that continuously generated enough power to operate itself, with a surplus.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    30. Re:Fool me twice... by jascat · · Score: 1

      Here I go playing into a troll...

      Well, considering jihad means effort or endeavors against man's own self and to work hard to do right things, then yes, it does warrant a jihad to correct your improper use of the term.

    31. Re:Fool me twice... by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Why do people make things up? To see how many people they can fool, perhaps? A few months back I received a forwarded email from my parents with the 2006 Darwin Awards. Naturally I was suspicious as not only was it a few months before the end of 2006, but a lot of those stories seemed really familiar. After checking into it, one of them was a Darwin Award from the late 90s, one from early 2000s, and assorted others. So they all were verified Darwin award winners, but someone felt the need to slap together a bunch and make themselves feel important by being the first one to produce the newest 2006 awards. I suppose it's the same cause as why some people make up stories about themselves that never happened. I don't get it either.
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    32. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, which is why I said *electric*. nitpick: No, you didn't say that. You said an electrician said that about a car. You didn't say an electric car. Although you may have been thinking it at the time, it helps to actually write it into your post.
    33. Re:Fool me twice... by jlarocco · · Score: 1

      This guy really should've been on the list.

    34. Re:Fool me twice... by jfeldredge · · Score: 1

      Your professor was using a non-standard definition. Dynamo is a common term for electric generators, particularly the large units used in generating stations to convert mechanical energy (such as from an engine or hydraulic turbine) into electricity. They aren't perpetual motion machines, however; some energy is lost as heat, so the electrical energy output is less than the mechanical energy input.

    35. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 1

      Well, it could also be that I am miss remembering after all these years! Or (more likely), it was one of those days I was only paying half attention and he jumped topics on me. Either there way, my use of "dynamo" in my original post was my usage, not my electrician friend. He described a hand off of perpetual motion devices that he seriously believed worked. Besides that, he was a great electrician. Still, I cannot believe I have been using that word wrong all these years...sigh.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    36. Re:Fool me twice... by nacturation · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One thing I've always wondered is how darwinawards.com became the defacto source. The Darwin Awards were started long before that site came to exist and yet there's a movie called The Darwin Awards to which the rights were licensed by darwinawards.com. The name was in use before that site got started, so it shouldn't be a trademark issue. The stories are all based around ones which are covered by various media sources, so it shouldn't be a copyright issue. Why should someone producing a movie have to license the rights for what is effectively a community concept? It's like an anonymous coward licensing the rights to "F1RST PSOT!!!" to a movie studio.

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    37. Re:Fool me twice... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      "They are real. There wouldn't be lots of point honoring a non-existent person for something they hadn't done."

      Actually, no. There is a nugget of fact at the base of the story; but it is often liberally rewritten for entertainment's sake.

      There was a "Darwin Awards Winner" from my state a few years ago. A lot of people (including me) were familiar with the real story from when it happened. Most of what was cited in the Darwin Awards text was fabricated; but it was true a guy was injured at the location mentioned.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    38. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The train one can't possibly be true. Trains in the US are incapable of traveling 50 mph.

    39. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 1

      With respect, you are wrong. I said "power something, such as a car, with a battery." The fact that the example device was a "car" immaterial, as it the fact that most car today are powered by gasoline.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    40. Re:Fool me twice... by ricree · · Score: 1
      Seriously - one of them starts with "I am 14, and I know this is a true story..." -- WTF?
      That one is listed as unconfirmed. I do agree that it looks really fake, and probably shouldn't even be on that page without a lot better confirmation, though.
    41. Re:Fool me twice... by Bastard+of+Subhumani · · Score: 1
      he believes that if you power something, such as a car, with a battery and use said device to recharge the battery, it will run forever
      However, this is the norm for petrol or diesel powered cars.
      No it isn't. Petrol or diesel cars have an external supply of energy. Usually it's petrol or diesel. And to keep it running, you have to put more of said liquid in. Nothing like a perpetual motion machine (which is what the grandparent was talking about) really.
      --
      Only three things are certain; death, taxes, and apocryphal quotations - Ben Franklin.
    42. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then it's a good thing that it didn't happen in the US!

    43. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A report about events in Turkey. What on earth has that got to do with America?

    44. Re:Fool me twice... by minus_273 · · Score: 1

      hey its just as much a troll as the comment about christians (which is modded funny BTW) or are you those that believe that islam cant be joked about?

      --
      The war with islam is a war on the beast
      The war on terror is a war for peace
    45. Re:Fool me twice... by minus_273 · · Score: 1

      hahaha thats hilarious. I'm adding you as a friend.

      --
      The war with islam is a war on the beast
      The war on terror is a war for peace
    46. Re:Fool me twice... by Grant_Watson · · Score: 1

      The post about jihad may not have been the most brilliantly argued, but your response is disingenious. Jihad means struggle; words are allowed to have more than one use, and the one he intended is obvious. Billy Graham may hold Crusades, but that does not mean that what began in 1095 has anything to do with Graham. Likewise for jihad.

      I'm tired of people saying that because jihad has a personal meaning it should not be used to refer to a Muslim holy war. That's just absurd.

    47. Re:Fool me twice... by rancher+dan+3 · · Score: 1

      Great. I point out a real live fact and get modded flamebait. F'n wonderful.

    48. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I do have those rights, and my lawyers will be contacting you about your blatant copyright violation.

    49. Re:Fool me twice... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      He described a hand off of perpetual motion devices that he seriously believed worked. Besides that, he was a great electrician.

      Another group of professionals that often have bizarre ideas about physics are automotive mechanics. You would not believe some of the things I've had them tell me. Of course, I'm never sure if they actually believe what they're saying, or are just trying to get more money out of me.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    50. Re:Fool me twice... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      With respect, you are wrong. I said "power something, such as a car, with a battery." The fact that the example device was a "car" immaterial, as it the fact that most car today are powered by gasoline. Since gasoline/diesel powered cars have batteries, you should probably have been more specific if you mean an electric car. This is Slashdot, not Madam Zorra's Psychic Mind-Reading Parlor.
      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    51. Re:Fool me twice... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      Another group of professionals that often have bizarre ideas about physics are automotive mechanics. You would not believe some of the things I've had them tell me. Of course, I'm never sure if they actually believe what they're saying, or are just trying to get more money out of me. If you think the things the mechanics say are bizarre, you should talk to the sales staff!
      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    52. Re:Fool me twice... by drxenos · · Score: 1

      No, the batteries in gas cars do not POWER them. They used to START them. I do not think it necessary to explain the meaning of "electric car." It's pretty a common term, and has never been applied to gas powered vehicles. I don't know if you are attempting to be obtuse, pedantic, or just back-peddling but it is obvious you just wish to argue. So, I just end this by saying good day.

      --


      Anonymous Cowards suck.
    53. Re:Fool me twice... by FishWithAHammer · · Score: 1

      No no no. The marketers are the ones who say the crazy stuff first. Sales is too clueless to question it.

      --
      "You can either have software quality or you can have pointer arithmetic, but you cannot have both at the same time."
    54. Re:Fool me twice... by Web+Goddess · · Score: 4, Informative

      Darwin Awards Condoms: Keep yourself out of the gene pool.

      My website has some cruft; however, I do my best to sort truth from fiction. And remember, I've improved over the years, and so has Internet-accessible news.

      There was this one time I was fooled "backwards" over a story I KNEW was an Urban Legend. It happened in the ocean off Pee Wee beach, near Darwin, Australia. The woman (a woman!) supposedly drank a case of beer before submerging to give head to her boyfriend... and never came back up. The man's lawyer was supposedly named Ms. Cox, and his last name was Payne. Plus the identical story was submitted hundreds of times. Urban legend for sure!

      A few years later... a few people have written to say the story is true, but you know, Pee Wee Beach? Ms. Cox? I still think it's an urban legend, until the Australian court reporter launches himself at me, irate, defamation of his reputation, something like that... Oops!

      Who knew?

      I have only quite recently started to link to the original submissions. But since late 2001, anyone can search the Slush Pile / Reject Pile and find the original sources. I try my very best to not alter facts, and to incorporate all the relevant facts, but well... sometimes I err on colorful ways of expressing things, or say what he might have been "thinking" which of course no one can know.

      Darwin Awards: The tree of life is self-pruning.

    55. Re:Fool me twice... by unitron · · Score: 1

      Shorting out one 1500 amp busbar should produce enough magnetic eddy currents to warp the metal panelboard sufficiently to cause the other two to short.

      --

      I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.

    56. Re:Fool me twice... by cswiger2005 · · Score: 1

      1500 amps/phase sounds like a building feeder here in NYC (it'd be about a residential block's worth in more rural areas). Of course, that's the designed sustained load; when you manage to do a phase short you'll experience extremely high transient current loads-- we're talking tens to possibly hundreds of thousands of amps-- for a fraction of one 60Hz cycle (ie, on the close order of a few milliseconds) until the fuses blow.

      Be glad it was the fuses which blew and not the equipment being powered by it. :-)

      Shorts like that are generally a result of frayed insulation, but human error (ie, cutting into a wall and cutting into a power line behind it) can cause them as well.

      --
      "The human race's favorite method for being in control of the facts is to ignore them." -Celia Green
    57. Re:Fool me twice... by Jacques+Chester · · Score: 1

      I live in Darwin.

      This is a true story, which turned up in that estimable journal of record, the NT News.

      As far as I know it's not called Pee Wee's beach, but there is a restaurant on East Point called "Pee Wee's on the Point".

      Cheers.

      --

      Classical Liberalism: All your base are belong to you.

    58. Re:Fool me twice... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Yeah it an industrial 480 three phase feeder for a printing pressroom.

      You are right, they hired someone to do a short circuit protection coordination analysis after that (i.e. why did the upstream fuses blow instead of the 1500amp breaker tripping)...

      They came up with something like 150,000 amps short current in their simulations.

      We do know what caused the initial short.

      What happened was that there was a 350 amp breaker for an A/C unit that went bad. The A/C shorted out somehow, and its breaker didn't flip. Eventually one of the upstream fuses blew for one phase, but not after the busbar was melted under the breaker.

      They took that breaker out, put a new one in at a different position with undamaged busbar, then powered everything on. It was all working so they went to put the cover back on the panel.

      I had walked out of the electrical closet because it was working at that point, so I was going to go turn the servers back on. I got about 25 feet out when the whole plant shuddered. It's hard to describe the sound of the wires jerking in their conduits like that. As they were placing the cover back on, something shifted and metal drippings from the initial short bridged two phases at the bottom of the busbars, blowing all three upstreams, and scaring the hell out of the maintenence guy putting that panel on!

      Of course we didn't have fuses like that on hand (sigh). It was hard enough to locate one 1500 amp fuse, much less finding 3 more the same day within a 60 mile radius! Not exactly something you can buy at the hardware store!

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    59. Re:Fool me twice... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Interesting. But the breakers would hold the busbars pretty solidly and there wasn't really any evidence of warping (unless it was completely elastic and it snapped back later).

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    60. Re:Fool me twice... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      I'd say it's meritocracy at work. Some time ago there were a handful of "Darwin Awards" websites. Wendy's seems to have provided a consistent level of quality and relatively regular updates. The others apparently did not hold up as well. (I remember finding the others as only slightly more believable than The Weekly World News, and about as reliable.) Furthermore, Wendy was able to make successful books out of her collected stories, which probably helped. That's the very essence of de facto, really. Wendy's site filled the role better than the others, and so became the de facto source.

      --Joe
    61. Re:Fool me twice... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      Wendy, I love the site.

      My only complaint? That red arrow animation. I think I'll put an ad-blocker rule in just for it. :-)

      Have you considered putting up an RSS feed?

      --Joe
    62. Re:Fool me twice... by lee7guy · · Score: 1

      you can't get fooled again.

      --
      Ceterum censeo Microsoftem esse delendam
    63. Re:Fool me twice... by nacturation · · Score: 1

      Yes, but what about the rights licensing?

      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    64. Re:Fool me twice... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      *shrug*

      I don't know a lot about the movie, but the Wikipedia page indicates it's based specifically on the website. That said, it seems natural to obtain licensing.

      I don't see it as being all that different than Weird Al asking for explicit permission to do song parodies, even though copyright law doesn't specifically require it.

    65. Re:Fool me twice... by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1
      I suppose it's the same cause as why some people make up stories about themselves that never happened. I don't get it either.
      Neither does my wife, Morgan Freeman ... whom I've slept with.
      --
      Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
    66. Re:Fool me twice... by nacturation · · Score: 1

      I don't know a lot about the movie, but the Wikipedia page [wikipedia.org] indicates it's based specifically on the website. That said, it seems natural to obtain licensing. Yeah, it just seems rather odd that since the website is based upon publicly available news articles that a movie studio would go out of its way and pay to license content which is basically public info. And the phrase Darwin Award was in use long before that site came into existence. Anyway, more power to the site owner for cashing in on it.
      --
      Want to improve your Karma? Instead of "Post Anonymously", try the "Post Humously" option.
    67. Re:Fool me twice... by Mr+Z · · Score: 1

      On further reflection, I wonder if it's more a marketing move than anything else. The website's already popular, so explicitly aligning yourself to the website theoretically gives you an automatic fan base. If instead, you just went out there using the name but distance yourself from the famous website and growing list of books, you might alienate the one group of people already known to appreciate the material.

    68. Re:Fool me twice... by jpostel · · Score: 1

      I think it odd too, but then people pay for bottled water...

      --
      Ummm, Jon, aren't you supposed to be dead...? - Otter(3800)
    69. Re:Fool me twice... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope that you actually meant Morgan Fairchild.

  2. Real as real can be. by ThePromenader · · Score: 1

    ...although the reaction to some of these should be: "get real".

    --

    No, no sig. Really.

    ThePromenader
  3. Fake by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I borrowed the book from the library. There was a scene where a snake coiled itself up around a gun someone dropped and then accidentally pulled the trigger and shot the guy. Just earlier, the man tried throwing the gun at the snake because he ran out of ammo.

  4. true (almost darwin) story... by udderly · · Score: 5, Interesting

    A friend of mine, who steadfastly refuses to read instructions, was assembling his new wet saw (used for cutting ceramic tile)), when I arrived at his house to help install the tile. A wet saw usually has a diamond coated blade similar to a circular saw (but without teeth), and a water reservoir and pump to cool the blade. The pump obviously has an electric cord, which is usually routed by or through the water reservoir.

    Because he hadn't read the directions he had routed the pump's electric cord IN FRONT OF THE SAW BLADE, and it would have been cut in two and dropped into the water pan when he started up the saw. What's more, he had it plugged into a 30-amp circuit. Luckily for him, I saw how he had put the saw together before he fired it up.

    The scary thing? He still won't read the instructions.

    1. Re:true (almost darwin) story... by Threni · · Score: 1

      Thanks for nothing. Let's hope his next fuckup kills himself...uh, I mean doesn't kill anyone else.

    2. Re:true (almost darwin) story... by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      It probably wouldn't have killed him. He'd need new pants though if that 30 amp circuit arced in front of him.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    3. Re:true (almost darwin) story... by tsajeff · · Score: 1

      I think that it qualifies for a Darwin Award if he removes his ability to reproduce but continues living.

    4. Re:true (almost darwin) story... by heson · · Score: 1

      Maybe he needs a GFCI for birthday, if he live that long. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Residual-current_devi ce

    5. Re:true (almost darwin) story... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If he ever ceases to be a good friend:

      1) Get him to mention you in his will,
      2) Take out a nice life insurance policy on him; and
      3) Buy him another dangerous tool (sans manual) for his birthday.

      No law against profiting from the stupidity of others ;-)

  5. Re:Fake -- Not! by SteveM · · Score: 4, Informative

    The story you are refering to is on page 36 of my copy. References to eight news sources are given for the story. And the story says nothing of the gun being unloaded. It does say that the man was tryign to pin the snakes head with the butt of the gun to catch it alive.

    The book lists stories in four categories, Darwin Awards, Honorable Mentions, Urban Legends, and Personal Accounts. Stories in the first two categories "are known or believed to be true". Urban legends "should be understood as the fables they are". Personal Accounts "are plausible but usually unverified". The also rates each of the first two categories as Confirmed by Darwin, meaning multiple credile sources, or Unconfimred by Darwin, for stories believed to be true but with fewer or unverifialbe sources. (Quotes from pages six and seven of The Darwin Awards.)

    SteveM

  6. Lightsabre fuel duels by CdBee · · Score: 4, Informative

    I can warrant for this one, it happpened 100 metres from my house in Hertfordshire, UK

    --
    I have been a user for about 10 years. This ends Feb 2014. The site's been ruined. I'm off. Dice, FU
    1. Re:Lightsabre fuel duels by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know the girl was very seriously hurt, but my understanding is that neither of them died. Do you know if this should be a Darwin award or just an honorable mention?

  7. "Stuff that matters" by chia_monkey · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ah yes, Slashdot, the source of news for nerds and stuff that matters.

    What would be really nice and noteworthy is if we could actually let Darwinism take its course. You just have to love how current laws and modern medicine continuously allow these people to live in our society, not only endangering themselves but also endangering the rest of society. "Only the strong survive" just isn't applicable anymore.

    --

    "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    1. Re:"Stuff that matters" by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      Be careful what you wish for. 2005 has an account of a winner who believed similarly.

    2. Re:"Stuff that matters" by MP3Chuck · · Score: 1

      ""Only the strong survive" just isn't applicable anymore."

      Perhaps, but if the Darwin Awards prove anything it's that the truly foolish still manage to sort themselves out! ;)

    3. Re:"Stuff that matters" by green1 · · Score: 1

      actually, I don't see how this applies, in the incident you quoted the person was against seatbelt laws because he thought that he knew better, and was also stupid enough not to wear one, it is the second category, and not the first that earned him the darwin award. I too can see the value in not forcing people to wear seatbelts (from the darwin perspective) in that it encourages those who aren't smart enough to see that they are a good idea to get themselves out of the gene pool. however the smarter ones will wear the seatbelt even if the law were not in place to force it (such as myself who is NEVER in a moving vehicle without wearing my seatbelt) the 2 statments are not at odds with each other, but only one of the 2 categories will get you a Darwin award.

    4. Re:"Stuff that matters" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it proves that some fools take care of themselves, not necessarily all. Honestly, in a thread of Darwin worship, I expect impeccible science.

    5. Re:"Stuff that matters" by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You are missing a crucial aspect of Darwinism if you quote, "Only the strong survive".

      The species is lost if there is only one survivor; or even two, three, etc.

      The full implication of Darwinism is best captured by, "From a diverse pool of candidates, only the strong thrive."

      Right now the effect of current law and modern medicine is to increase the diversity of our gene pool. We now have untold genetic richness what with decreasing disease and infant mortality and high levels of inter-racial mixing. When (not if) a catastrophe occurs we will have a sufficiently rich gene pool to survive such a catastrophe.

      Such as, for example, an airborne AIDs epidemic. Until it happens no one (not even you) can predict which gene sequences and which individuals will survive. That is why it is good for as many people to exist before such an event occurs.

    6. Re:"Stuff that matters" by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 1

      Hey, guess what? You're reading Slashdot on New Year's Eve! That means you will never reproduce. I therefore nominate you for a Darwin Award. (Yes, I realize I'm doing the same thing.)

      --
      If you can read this sig, you're too close.
    7. Re:"Stuff that matters" by EvilIdler · · Score: 1

      It's "survival of the fittest", or as Darwin elaborated, the ones most responsive to change.

    8. Re:"Stuff that matters" by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      Herbert Spencer, not Darwin, coined "Survival of the fittest".

      Modern Darwinism has evolved since Darwin elaborated on "The origin of species".

      Again, even in pure non human societies such as wolves, ants, and birds, nonfit are allowed to survive as long as they are "fit enough".

      This is allowed, even encouraged, to increase diversity otherwise you get unwanted founder effects, such as all cheetahs being related closely enough that you can perform skin grafts from one to another.

    9. Re:"Stuff that matters" by Sir+Toby · · Score: 1

      Meh. I'm just cooling my heels a bit before going out to a New Year's Eve party at a local arcade.

      What? Going to a New Year's Even party at an arcade is just further indication that I'll never reproduce?

      CRAP!

  8. Re:Not so well... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

    Agreed. After all, the ability to spell is oh so important when determining someone's intelligence.

  9. RPG? by Wormbrain · · Score: 5, Funny

    "whacking RPGs with hammers.."

    Here I am thinking one of my favorite MMOs got nerfed. I need to get out more.

    --
    http://wormbrain.com/
    1. Re:RPG? by amper · · Score: 3, Funny

      And here I am, trying to figure out how one could possibly get killed by whacking a D&D set with a hammer...

      OK, maybe if you gave a d8 a hard enough glancing blow, it might shoot off at a bizarre angle, blast right through your eye, and lodge in your brain?

    2. Re:RPG? by lgw · · Score: 1

      No, no, not the brain - you don't have to kill yourself to get a Darwin award, you know.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    3. Re:RPG? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      No, it's just that people who play RPG's don't ever breed, therefore taking themselves out of the gene pool

    4. Re:RPG? by WWWWolf · · Score: 1
      OK, maybe if you gave a d8 a hard enough glancing blow, it might shoot off at a bizarre angle, blast right through your eye, and lodge in your brain?

      Oh come on now, everyone knows the d4s are deadlier than the mediaeval caltrops, and twice as painful... =)

  10. I believe! by beaverfever · · Score: 4, Informative

    They do claim these are true stories. I can attest for at least one of them. The 1996 silly-sad tale of the lawyer jumping against the windows in the skyscraper office where he worked was in many Toronto news sources at the time. Where this event occurred is a very busy area, so there were plenty of witnesses.

    It was later that same year when I heard of the Darwin awards, as someone mentioned that this well-known story was nominated.

    1. Re:I believe! by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 1

      The story isn't complete without pictures of the incident:

      Canada FITC coverage of the incident

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  11. Whacking RPG by stesch · · Score: 3, Funny

    On my AS/400 job I wanted to whack RPG with a hammer, too.

  12. Just malicious by badzilla · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know I'll get flamed but will say it anyway - I think this site is just plain cruel to take the piss out of people who have had severe accidents with fatal results. Especially as things ain't always what they seem, such as the side-splitting hilarious story of Vietnamese bomb-rollers who got blown up. According to TFA they know perfectly well it is dangerous but are forced to do it anyway because they are starving and get a few cents if they can reclaim the scrap metal.

    --
    "Don't belong. Never join. Think for yourself. Peace." V.Stone, Microsoft Corporation
    1. Re:Just malicious by shlepp · · Score: 0

      I don't know about you, but i find amusement in reading about people dieing doing retarded things that wouldn't be done with a gram of common sense. With the rolling the bomb down the hill, if they where any sort of experts they would have disarmed and dismantled it and would be alive and have money and maybe even made money from selling the explosives as well.

    2. Re:Just malicious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course they're poor. They live in a communist country.

    3. Re:Just malicious by iluvcapra · · Score: 1
      I think this site is just plain cruel to take the piss out of people who have had severe accidents with fatal results

      Just remember, for every moron that tries to light a campfire in an ordinance dump, China kills a democrat, a stray not-so-smart-bomb kills an Iraqi math whiz, and a chemical plant releases phosgene into a river valley.

      Stupid people kill themselves a hundreth as often as they kill others, either by accident or malice. And in the second case, it's always the smart people they kill first.

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
    4. Re:Just malicious by noidentity · · Score: 1

      I agree; the only justification for criticizing people for their stupidity is if it puts other people at risk (potential offspring excluded) or burdens them in some significant way.

    5. Re:Just malicious by rbarreira · · Score: 1

      On a very positive note, at least someone might learn something from reading the website; specifically, what NOT to do if you value your life.

      --

      The AACS key is NOT 0xF606EEFD628B1CA427BEA93A9CA9773F
  13. Wait a minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Star Wars Dawrin Award has popped up all over the 'net in various forms over the years. I call shenanigans. Anonymous-san...I mean, shit, wrong site. AC is not pleased.

    1. Re:Wait a minute by n0dna · · Score: 2, Informative

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/hert s/4575291.stm

      I guess if I couldn't work google, I'd post AC too.

  14. Your name is "badzilla?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    How can you call yourself badzilla and NOT think the stories are funny ;-)

  15. Humorous reminders need not be malicious by dfoulger · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I have a very good friend who, despite knowing all the reasons why she shouldn't, smokes. This years "Stubbed Out" made an impression. If the effect is to get one person to stop smoking (or doing other really stupid things like igniting gasoline in florescent tubes), they server a valuable social function.

    --
    Davis http://davis.foulger.net
    1. Re:Humorous reminders need not be malicious by dfoulger · · Score: 1

      So good of you to maintain your composure. A true sign of arguing from logic rather than emotion. Forget self-righteousness. I might die tomorrow when a car hits my bicycle in New York City. Death happens. I'd prefer that it happened less quickly than it probably will for my friend, but she'll die eventually no matter what. If you want to commit slow motion suicide its your business. Justify it any way you want. Smoke as many packs a day as you want. Deep fry your food in trans-fats. Just don't shorten my life with it. That, in the end, is what the public bans are about ... hurting other people.

      --
      Davis http://davis.foulger.net
    2. Re:Humorous reminders need not be malicious by UncleTogie · · Score: 1, Interesting
      You spend too much time in server closets.

      ....they server a valuable social function.
      I imagine that as a non-smoker, smoking annoys you. Fine. Your pretentious self-righteous rhetoric annoys me, but the First Amendment states you have your say. You want to gripe about the evils of second-hand smoke. Fine. I'm not arguing the simple fact that inhaling fine particulate matter isn't healthy. I've lost family to cancer. I've also had 80-year old grandmothers that smoke daily, and get around better than someone half their age. It's a risky individual choice that may not be seen as "proper" {like face-piercing, tongue- or penis-splitting, etc,] but I'll be damned if I'll listen to some pink-lunged ninny lecture me on my life choices. I'll leave you with a thought:

      I live in San Antonio, and a little while back we were about to lose some federal funds due to some smog. Well, the local politicos all hit the air, and the suggestions ran from car-pooling to taking the bus to switching to electric mowers and only mowing on certain days, etc. In every smog scenario I'd heard, cars and industry were the problem. Well, riddle me this: Why weren't smokers included?

      [BTW, a lame "well, because they knew smokers wouldn't quit smoking" WILL be countered with "..and die-hard yuppies will NOT give up their H3s," so PLEASE choose another line.]
      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    3. Re:Humorous reminders need not be malicious by dfoulger · · Score: 1

      Good catch. Spell checking can only reduce the effects of dyslexia so much. I don't, however, spend any time at all in server closets (all my servers are under my desk).

      Seriously, though, San Antonio does have its problems, including politicians who don't take the problems of the cities rapid growth seriously. I just stayed in a hotel downtown for a week, and it appears that, at this point, most of the city inside the inner beltway could be productively razed and replaced with a theme park. It makes the Bronx, at its worst, look upscale by comparison.

      It still doesn't make anything (except maybe having clean air to breath) you address an issue of civil liberties.

      --
      Davis http://davis.foulger.net
  16. Fool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "current laws and modern medicine" ??

    Ok, so now what do you mean? "modern medicine" ? The less healthy have nothing to contribute to society? A person who's life was saved by antibiotics is incapable of inventing something that improves our quality of life and survivability?

    Similarly, by "current laws", I'll assume you mean seatbelt type laws? You may feel this only causes certain less intelligent to dies(though that's not true). However the less intellectual folks among us (am I talking to you?) may contribute something too .. such as being kind to others, helping to build stuff, doing all the actual real work, etc.

    Our strength as a species is enhanced by our ability to help others survive.

    This must be true in the case of other species too, because even buffalo sometimes attempt daring rescues of their "weak" from the jaws of predators (you didnt know this?).

    Now if you weren't darwinally weak yourself you'd probably have known this already.

    Anyway, I don't want to over argue this point .. because quite frankly .. what if you're right? So next time you get sick maybe will you be avoiding modern medicine? After all, your view is that you'll be doing your species (clowns?) a favor. I'll personally nominate you for a Darwin award.

    1. Re:Fool. by chia_monkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      No point in arguing, but I will clarify. For the "modern medicine", I'm not speaking of the sick and weak but more specifically dealing with the people that do dumb things that result in shooting themselves in the face or drinking themselves to oblivion and then being fixed up in the hospital. Same goes with smokers (disclaimer: both my parents smoke and my grandmother passed from lung cancer two years ago)...people smoke knowing it's going to kill them sooner than they would naturally die yet they do it and then the hospitals and keep them living, allowing the smokers to not only fill their own lungs with a cancerous death but also those non-smokers around them.

      "Current laws"...one could argue helmet laws. Other laws that diminish our intelligence are all the disclaimers we have to put on everything now. "Do not stick fork in eye", "coffee is hot", etc. If someone doesn't have the common sense not to stick their hand in a blender while it is on, they probably should learn a lesson one way or the other.

      I by no means want people to get hurt. It just pains me to see common sense going down the drain...and the people with lack of common sense being "rewarded" with lawsuits that pay them for their lack of common sense.

      --

      "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lampposts...for support rather than illumination." - Andrew Lang
    2. Re:Fool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      No point in arguing, but I will clarify. For the "modern medicine", I'm not speaking of the sick and weak but more specifically dealing with the people that do dumb things that result in shooting themselves in the face or drinking themselves to oblivion and then being fixed up in the hospital.


      What about shooting themselves in the testicle?

      Okay okay.. it's an urban legend.. but it made me laugh.. and cringe just a bit.
    3. Re:Fool. by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

      If you actually bothered to look up the hot coffee case you would find out that the coffee was served at boiling. That's a good case for a lawsuit, being served toxic liquid at a restaurant instead of coffee.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    4. Re:Fool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the "modern medicine", I'm not speaking of the sick and weak...

      Why not? There are many heritable traits which humanity's gene pool would be better off without - why is stupidity different from the others?

    5. Re:Fool. by haeger · · Score: 2, Insightful
      ...not only fill their own lungs with a cancerous death but also those non-smokers around them.

      This annoys me too. I have this urge to fill a spraybottle with water and start spraying it in very very close proximity to smokers. Then proceed to explain to them that it's "just urine, it doesn't cause cancer or is harmful in any other way, quite opposite to what you're posioning me with".

      Somehow I don't think they'll appriciate it so I should probably brush up on my wushu before attempting this. In case I need to defend myself.

       

      .haeger

      --
      You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. -- Harlan Ellison
    6. Re:Fool. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I never understood how someone who drives a car, or for that matter uses electricity generated by the burning of fuels, can complain about second hand smoke with a straight face.

      If you don't drive a car, or use electricity, I might be able to sympathize with your plight.

    7. Re:Fool. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Not to defend smokers (I hate their vile habit as well), but smoking usually doesn't kill you until AFTER you've had ample opportunity to reproduce. Your existence demonstrates one example of this. So, it's not exactly a "selected-against" trait.

      Darwinism is about surviving just long enough to replicate and ensuring that your children live long enough such that they too can replicate.

      It has nothing to do with intelligence, morality or whatever other human attribute you may want to attribute to it.

    8. Re:Fool. by winwar · · Score: 1

      "I never understood how someone who drives a car, or for that matter uses electricity generated by the burning of fuels, can complain about second hand smoke with a straight face."

      For the same reason I don't have a problem with smokers smoking in public. I never felt the urge to pipe my car exhaust into an enclosed space. YMMV :)

    9. Re:Fool. by Belial6 · · Score: 1

      I really did mean in out door places. Living in California, where public indoor smoking has been illegal for well over a decade now, I often forget that not all states have the same laws concerning indoor smoking. It shouldn't, but every time I travel to a place that doesn't have the anti-indoor-smoking laws, I get a mild surprise.

  17. The Slashdot reader Darwin award. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So, anyways, New Years Eve, there's this guy, right, and, well... let's call him Charles just for the hell of it. Anyway, "Charles", stayed at home on New Years Eve reading Slashdot. He found it so enjoyable that "Charles" continued reading Slashdot every day. After his discovery, Charles never went to any parties, never got drunk, never got laid, never socialized. Charles has been removed from the gene pool. Thanks Slashdot for another Darwin winner!

    1. Re:The Slashdot reader Darwin award. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Charles" never got invited to any parties in the first place. It's hardly his fault he stayed at home.

      </bitter>

    2. Re:The Slashdot reader Darwin award. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      never got laid, never socialized. Charles has been removed from the gene pool. Thanks Slashdot for another Darwin winner!

      As Dilbert points out, us nerds are working on mitosis so that we can reproduce without mating.

  18. Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by joneshenry · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So why isn't Christine Boskoff going to be the clear winner for a Darwin Award? The person might have been extremely intelligent, but what can one say about a plan to climb remote mountains in China with only one companion and no method of communication to the outside world for weeks? As the Christine Boskoff Wikipedia article notes, she did not even leave word of where she was going so that potential rescue teams would have no idea where to find her.

    So why is it funny when probably uneducated people do something stupid while it isn't funny for someone who used to be an "electrical engineer working for Lockheed Aeronautical in Georgia", "a pilot", and who "designed software for a lighted control display for the C-130J" to do something equally stupid to eliminate herself from the gene pool? Articles I have read such as the above article from 2002 indicate she had no children, so Christine Boskoff removed herself from the gene pool through her stupid actions. Evidently being a former electrical engineer and then becoming a mountain climber/entrepreneur is something that Darwinian evolution selects against. (Even her former husband killed himself in 1999.) So why aren't we all laughing at that?

    1. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's not really Darwinish, lots of people go off on treks and don't tell anyone where they are going, but they know full well that they could die. That's their right as a FREE human being. I know lots of people who do this and their friends and family accept it. The question is: did she do something stupid ("Darwin-ish") to get herself killed.
      Yes, it's sad that she cannot be located, but it's not stupid... maybe she did this on purpose.
      Geesh, you don't have to be tethered to email, cell phones, or whatever 24 hours a day... just get out and ENJOY LIFE and be a fatalist...if you die, you die...that's life (or death)!

    2. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      So why is it funny when probably uneducated people do something stupid while it isn't funny for someone who used to be an "electrical engineer working for Lockheed Aeronautical in Georgia", "a pilot", and who "designed software for a lighted control display for the C-130J" to do something equally stupid to eliminate herself from the gene pool?


      I agree with you.. she's even more of a Darwin award candidate since one may assume that she should have known better.

      One thing is that coming from a family that's half blue collar and half white collar, sometimes pure intelligence isn't enough. Common sense is the definite issue here. I'd wager that for every time somebody on the blue team does something like "hey, we can make a carbide cannon using a heavy duty soup can.. no.. no wait.. let's use a more convenient thinass beer can instead" we've got somebody on the white team too dumb to kill the breaker before performing DIY electrical work on their house.
    3. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      > So why aren't we all laughing at that?

      Because it's not humorous/entertaining? I mean, many people die from these expeditions, but I would bet that not many would intentionally fly a kite in a thunderstorm...

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    4. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      I don't know about you, but I am. Ha ha ha.

    5. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by canajin56 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Read that article more carefully. It wasn't a thunderstorm. He hit some power lines with his kite, which the "article" says is like Franklin because power lines are sort of like an artificial thunder storm ;)

      --
      ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI
    6. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by nEoN+nOoDlE · · Score: 1

      So why aren't we all laughing at that?

      It takes a sick, cruel person to laugh at a Darwin Award... so I'll be the first: Ha Ha!

      --
      Don't trust a bull's horn, a doberman's tooth, a runaway horse or me.
    7. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by KjetilK · · Score: 1

      Being someone who is seriously contemplating something relatively similar, I have to disagree. My trip will not be as technically difficult as hers, but it will be even more remote. There simply exists no way to reliably communicate with the outside world, not even satellite phone, and a helicopter rescue would be extremely hazardous to the rescuers, and so we won't even tell them where we're going so as not expose them to the risk.

      Doing those climbs, being the first person on earth to enter one of those very few unchartered lands on the planet, having to ties, that's freedom. It is exploration. It is what has driven our species to what it is today. For most, the most important thing is that they are safe. But for some, we're not really living that way. We need to try out the limits to know where they are. And we need to feel alive and free.

      In doing that, of course you try as hard as you can not to kill yourself. But it is not stupid, it is exploration.

      --
      Employee of Inrupt, Project Release Manager and Community Manager for Solid
    8. Re:Not so funny candidate--Christine Boskoff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have read so many of these faux-heroic proclamations, it makes me sick. It is arrogant nonsense to claim "Doing those climbs, being the first person on earth to enter one of those very few unchartered lands on the planet" when there are populations of people living in those remote areas who have no doubt climbed those peaks, maybe thousands of years before you were born, with no fanfare or attendant media fuss. The statement quoted would likely be true only if you were climbing a peak on another planet. So why not accomplish that before you make such sweeping and condescending generalizations.

  19. let Darwinism take its course by exp(pi*sqrt(163)) · · Score: 1

    Is that like letting gravity take its course?

    --
    Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
  20. Favorite Darwin Award Classic by dattaway · · Score: 2, Insightful

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JATO_Rocket_Car

    "the staff of the Darwin Awards decided it was such a funny story to "grandfather" it in and let it keep its award."

    cultdeadcow link at the bottom has the most amazing recent version.

    1. Re:Favorite Darwin Award Classic by Maserati · · Score: 1

      And here's a legible version of the story that CDC is (apparently) mirroring. It's a fun read, kinda like if the Mad Scientists Club did their planning in a dive bar.

      --
      Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
    2. Re:Favorite Darwin Award Classic by qzulla · · Score: 1
      Wired has another good story about the JATO car. Actually sounds feasible.

      qz

  21. Re:Not so well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    u r so rite man !! i tel meh teecha it alla time

  22. Faithful Flotation by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The one about the pastor who couldn't walk on water is either particularly hard to believe, or else it is leaving out the most critical/entertaining part of the story.

    When I imagine someone trying to walk across a river, the picture that comes to mind is that the fool steps into the river and notices that his feet are wet. Then he takes a few more steps and notices that he's up to his thighs in water. At this point, he's neither dead nor still under the illusion he can walk on water.

    So what happened? Did he, having lost face, decide to continue into the water and drown himself? Or did he begin his water walking in a deep part (e.g. take the ferry halfway into the river and try walking from there?). Or did he successfully walk on water until he got to the deep part, then realize how impossible it was and suddenly suffer a loss of faith and fall through the surface? ;-) Or is the story just bullshit?

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:Faithful Flotation by sydneyfong · · Score: 1

      The REAL question is, if there were people watching him perform this "feat", they should have rescued him when he was submerged. And if there weren't people watching him... who knows exactly why he was drowned?

      --
      Don't quote me on this.
    2. Re:Faithful Flotation by green1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know the particulars of this case, however if it's anything like some of the rivers around here it is quite believable.
      a lot of our rivers have rocky banks so that the first step will put you thigh deep in water, these same rivers are extremely fast flowing (not to mention VERY cold) if you take that first step, you're done for, the current will sweep you off your feet the instant you land in the water, and even an expert swimmer is unlikely to be able to recover before their head is smashed in to another rock.

      In reality there's no way of knowing all the circumstances surrounding the event from the description on that page (how much detail can you cram in to one paragraph?) however dismissing it out of hand is probably not called for either...

    3. Re:Faithful Flotation by rtra · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've met a elder villager who tried to walk on water. He strapped some small floaters to his feet. And he floated allright, but upside down, with his head submerse. He was rescued by his spectators. He was from village "Palorca", Trás-os-Montes, Portugal.

    4. Re:Faithful Flotation by dufachi · · Score: 1

      Oh, my bullshit meter is definitely in the red on that one, and not from the tales I tell the people downstairs to cover-up my excessive geekiness. ;-)

      --
      -Kinsey
    5. Re:Faithful Flotation by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Funny

      It was in an estuary, which is where a river meets the ocean. He apperently started walking into the water, and kept on going until the water got over his head, and never came back. Can't say for sure what he was thinking, but I know people who would hold onto such faith until death, thinking, "if I give up now it shows I don't have faith."

      I give him props for strongly believing whatever it was he preached, though if he's in heaven now, Jesus is probably bitch-slapping him sayin, "you don't know nothing about faith!"

      Great story in any case.

      --
      Qxe4
    6. Re:Faithful Flotation by CTachyon · · Score: 1

      From the sound of the story, I assume that he started in deep water. The Biblical story has Jesus & Friends on a boat when the water-walking happens, so perhaps he was emulating that...

      --
      Range Voting: preference intensity matters
    7. Re:Faithful Flotation by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  23. hmm missing some notables by minus_273 · · Score: 0

    I am surprised Saddam was not mentioned. That and the morons who killed themselves protesting the mohammed cartoons.

    --
    The war with islam is a war on the beast
    The war on terror is a war for peace
    1. Re:hmm missing some notables by MLease · · Score: 1

      Saddam's death wasn't suicide, it was an execution. The Darwins are for people who remove THEMSELVES from the gene pool. Saddam fails to qualify on both the self-removal aspect and the gene pool aspect (he did live long enough to breed).

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
    2. Re:hmm missing some notables by edschurr · · Score: 1

      Suicides do not count for a Darwin Award. If you commit suicide then your death wasn't unintentional by definition, though I presume you didn't mean it like that. An execution could be caused by ones own poor judgement, however I don't think the Darwin Awards like such stories even though the chain of causation might stem from oneself. Saddam Hussein's death wasn't from his own spectacular poor judgement anyway.

      If you have progeny you can still get a Darwin Award. Your progency do not get 100% of your DNA, so you may not have given them the combination of stupid genes.

    3. Re:hmm missing some notables by MLease · · Score: 1

      Point taken; I was imprecise. What I meant was that Saddam did not directly cause his own death through his own stupid actions. He was an evil, bloodthirsty dictator and deserved execution, but there are many in that category who do not get what they deserve, and there are too many people executed annually to give a Darwin to each one.

      As to progeny not being a disqualification, I guess that's true, but it does seem that if one lives into one's 60's and reproduces multiple times, it's a little silly to give one credit for removing oneself from the gene pool. Oh, well. :)

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
  24. No integrity by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I lost all respect for the Darwin Awards when they refused to give one to JFK Jr.

    Some jackass flying an airplane in conditions that he had not been certified for and kills himself, his wife and his sister-in-law and they call it a "lapse of judgement" not worthy of a Darwin award.

    LK

    --
    "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    1. Re:No integrity by minus_273 · · Score: 1

      i suspect it has something to do with his "pedigree". Heck you shoudl give it to the woman Ted Kennedy killed too. How stupid can you be riding in a car at night on an island driven by a drunk kennedy.

      --
      The war with islam is a war on the beast
      The war on terror is a war for peace
    2. Re:No integrity by lpangelrob · · Score: 1

      I agree with the final decision; crashing a plane in this method is indeed accidental and stupid, but also commonplace, generally involving people not named John F. Kennedy Jr.

    3. Re:No integrity by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      I agree with the final decision; crashing a plane in this method is indeed accidental and stupid, but also commonplace, generally involving people not named John F. Kennedy Jr.

      How many of those other people were attempting to make an instrument landing at night, during foggy conditions while not certified to do so?

      He wasn't included because of who his family is.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    4. Re:No integrity by GigsVT · · Score: 1

      Most of them! I read FAA accident reports, I guess kind of a sick hobby. The vast majority of incidents are small planes, and the majority of the small plane incidents that are fatal are indeed "VFR rated pilot flying into IFR conditions, colliding with terrain".

      So unless you want to give out several dozen darwin awards every year to everyone that crashes in a similar way, it wouldn't be right to single out JFK for doing it.

      --
      I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
    5. Re:No integrity by MLease · · Score: 1

      Actually, I think the only reason to include him would have been his family connections, and I suspect that's the only reason you really wanted to see him included. Nobody would have heard or cared much about it, except locally, if he'd been Jim Smith. It wasn't especially spectacular or unusual, in the way the Darwins typically are; it was a simple accident brought on by inexperience and overconfidence, just like many auto accidents, etc. Killing oneself in a plane crash (even if it did involve terrible judgment) vs. electrocuting fish and then oneself trying to collect them or playing Russian Roulette with a tank mine or blowing oneself up due to failing to allow for a DST/Standard time difference in the bomb timer? Not even close. Discard your obvious prejudice against Kennedys and compare the circumstances to the other 1999 winners.

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
    6. Re:No integrity by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I lost all respect for the Darwin Awards when they refused to give one to JFK Jr. Some jackass flying an airplane in conditions that he had not been certified for

      D.A. generally downgrades "extreme sports" mistakes, as described in another message. Small planes could be considered a form of "extreme sport".

    7. Re:No integrity by Lord+Kano · · Score: 1

      Nobody would have heard or cared much about it, except locally, if he'd been Jim Smith.

      Jim Smith didn't rate an opening spot on the nightly news.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    8. Re:No integrity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The wife and sister-n-law were innocent bystanders. Killing bystanders is an automatic disqualification for the Darwin award.

  25. Animals getting revenge... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  26. Re:And this years special goes to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You forget that soldiers always convcieve children before they go to war. since most soldiers don't die yet still follow the reproduce-before-deployment rule they actually increase their representation in the gene pool. Why would you make killing your profession (with the risk of being killed) if it wasn't to make room for your genes.

  27. Mountaneering and other "Extreme Sports" exempted. by Ellis+D.+Tripp · · Score: 4, Informative

    From the Darwin Awards rules page at:

    http://darwinawards.com/rules/rules2.html

    "Those who participate in extreme sports are not automatically eligible, as they knowingly assume an increased risk of death. They are, in a sense, correctly applying their judgment that the entertainment is worth the risk. However bizarre the sport, an additional misapplication of judgment must be present in order for the deceased to qualify for a Darwin Award."

    --
    Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
  28. Topic dyslexia by dfoulger · · Score: 1

    Apologies for the civil liberties reference (a hangover from the "Bill of Wrongs" article. Smoking has come up as an issue in both discussions.

    Its quite relevant in this discussion because of the rather direct and extreme effect on the individual who self-ignited. Both self-ignition and self-nomination for a Darwin award are certainly protected civil liberties. ;-)

    --
    Davis http://davis.foulger.net
  29. First Prize goes to; by jafac · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Saddam Hussein.

    The lesson: when Don Rumsfeld sells you Chemical Weapons precursors to use in gassing domestic political opponents, don't cross him, or he'll FUCK you.

    --

    These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
  30. Stupid Spearfisher by pNutz · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I heard this story at least seven years ago, when I was getting my diving certification. Some idiot spears a Jewfish, gets tangled in the line and is dragged to his watery death. The legend of the idiot Jewfish-er who forgets his knife and common sense on the boat is not by any means new, and this tale has no references. Different from the chain letter how?

    Also, from the 'man-tries-to-jump-from-train' story:
    "I am 14, and I know for a fact this story is true."
    Convincing. Actually, only one of these stories has any references.

    This is garbage, as usual. They find a couple of real facts and laugh at the people who died, then make some others up because humanity is just not stupid enough to die in an amusing manner for the legions of misanthropes.

    --
    Death and danger are my various breads and various butters.
    1. Re:Stupid Spearfisher by edwardpickman · · Score: 1

      I think the truth is it's a fairly common thing, spearing the fish, to happen but this particular time it made the national papers. It's like most posionous snake bite victims in the US are 18 to 25 males that are drunk at the time. They find a snake beside the road and try to kill it with a stick. It's so commonplace that the Darwin Awards ignores that form of death. Personally I think the train story is apocraphil but it's hard to say. People have been known to jump trains when they missed their stop so it's possible but I doubt the details are accurate. I have heard stories of morons spearing whales and sharks and getting dragged under and drowning. I personally used to know a diver that nearly drowned because he forgot his dive knife. The event didn't involve a fish he got tangled up in some lines but it does happen and divers drown. Cave diving is another one that is just plain stupid but people still do it. A frightening number of the diving deaths are from cave diving. There's a place I believe in Texas that's a popular place to cave dive but the opening is so small the only way to get in is to take your tank off and drag it behind you. A number of people a year die in that cave because the panic when they try to get back out again. They probably should seal it to protect people from their own stupidity. Like I say I know I've heard the Grouper story before and I even heard it once in New Zealand but I tend to think it's a common "accident" so more than likely most of the tellings are false but only because it's so common the stories get repeated and distorted in the telling.

    2. Re:Stupid Spearfisher by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jewfishes are very dangerous. Ask the Lebanese and the Palestinians.

    3. Re:Stupid Spearfisher by pNutz · · Score: 1

      Other terrifying fishes include the the Italian Oilfish (or Wop'pi), the Soused Mickey, the Western Atlantic Nee-gar, and the Yellow-Bellied Honkey Racistjocmaker.

      --
      Death and danger are my various breads and various butters.
  31. Posthumous Award..... by IHC+Navistar · · Score: 1

    I would like to posthumously nominate Matthew Carrington for the Darwin Awards. Apparently, Mr. Carrington thought is was a good idea and worthwhile to chug water while doing calisthenic.

    The ultimate irony is this:

    The game was a quiz-show type game, where the pledges had to answer questions. If the pledge got the answer wrong, they then had to drink water and do calisthenics. Mr. Carrington got so many questions wrong, that he drank enough water to cause his own death by over-hydration.

    Not only wast he stupid enough the participate in such a contest as a requirement to get into a fraternity (a stupid rationale as it is), but he answered so many questions wrong that he had to drink enough water to cause death by over-hydration.

    Now there are laws that punish other people for an individuals stupid choices. If he was forced at gunpoint, then it definitely would have not been his fault. But, since he VOLUNTARILY made the choise to participate in the contest, and CONTINUE TO STAY IN THE CONTEST (your body will tell you when you are doing something you shouldn't be doing. To over-hydrate and not know it is baloney)so the HE COULD BE IN A FRATERNITY, is ENTIRELY his fault alone.

    --
    Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
    1. Re:Posthumous Award..... by nomadic · · Score: 2, Informative

      your body will tell you when you are doing something you shouldn't be doing. To over-hydrate and not know it is baloney

      I strenuously disagree. Death by over-hydration happens frequently because people don't realize they're overhydrated. The symptoms of overhydration are similar to those for a lot of other medical conditions (bizarrely, a lot of them mimic the symptoms for dehydration).

    2. Re:Posthumous Award..... by silentounce · · Score: 1

      You are 100% correct. I passed out in boot camp because I was overhydrated. The Drill Instructors kept having me drink water and the symptoms wouldn't go away. I eventually pissed myself and passed out in the chow line. That's when they realized what was really wrong and the simple solution was to wait it out. It could have been much worse though. I don't really believe that they were ignorant either, it's just that the symptoms are so similar, and recruits more commonly suffer dehydration than superhydration. People also do this to themselves purposefully to get a high, although that may also be an urban legend in itself.

      --
      There are many tongues to talk, and but few heads to think. -Victor Hugo
  32. "Do Not Use" by nickv111 · · Score: 1

    In this age of liability, it seems anyone can be sued for no reason. This is why my dad and I thought of a wonderful idea to prevent companies from being sued for absolutely no reason over people doing ridiculous things. Some doors nowadays even say, "Warning: Door May Open At Any Time." To correct this problem, just slap a sticker on your product that says, "Do Not Use." IANAL, but as far as I can tell, it's as good as any other sticker to prevent you from being sued.

    1. Re:"Do Not Use" by glavenoid · · Score: 1

      ...Or like the hairdryer that says "Do NOT use in shower"... Damn, if only I had some mod points for you!

      --
      I, for one, am looking forward to the inevitable /. beta rollout fallout.
    2. Re:"Do Not Use" by AHumbleOpinion · · Score: 1

      I really has been done. A friend at work showed us a warning from the manual that came with a rifle. It literally said to not load the rifle since severe bodily injury or death could result.

    3. Re:"Do Not Use" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The obvious problem is that then your customers will sue you for fraud: they needed the product to do X, and the similar products by competitors are quite usable at doing X, but the product you sold them isn't safe to use for X by your own admission. You need to make it very clear in all your advertising that the product is not usable, and this will severely limit your market share.

  33. Irrelevant. by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1

    I can't find the exact reference, but they only consider your ability to reproduce after the fact, not whether you actually have before the fact -- because that is hard to track reliably even if everyone's being honest, and you're ignoring stuff like bastard children who think their mother's husband is their father....

    --
    Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
  34. Real news by Propaganda13 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I prefer http://newsoftheweird.com/ These are taken from newspapers around the world. When I found the site, I did double check several stories to determine that they were printed in actual newspapers.

    1. Re:Real news by Cruise_WD · · Score: 1

      I've always enjoyed the Fortean Times, though I'm not sure how easy it is to get hold of outside England (though I've seen it in a library in Toronto, so hey...). As an added plug, I do some of the comuter game reviews in the back :P

      --
      [ cruise / casual-tempest.net / xenogamous.com / transference.org / quantam sufficit ]
  35. Re:Mountaneering and other "Extreme Sports" exempt by no+reason+to+be+here · · Score: 1

    One could argue that Christine did demonstrate a further misapplication of judgement, as she told no one where she was going and had only one companion to climb in a remote region of a foreign nation. It wasn't just the extreme sport nature of her death, there were those additional factors which the o.p. pointed out, which, some would, including myself, say merits a Darwin Award being presented to her.

  36. Scooped! Arghhh. by Web+Goddess · · Score: 3, Informative

    I was scooped on my own story! I was so looking forward to submitting the 2006 Darwin Awards to /. But thanks for turning your minds towards the honorable deaths of these men and women... well OK mostly men... whose heroic self-sacrifice improves our gene pool.

    We owe the winners a debt of gratitude!

    Here's what it looks like to be slashdotted: In the past seventeen hours, my top referers are:

            646 www.bluesnews.com
            649 www.fazed.org
            659 b2.is
            941 www.b2.is
            967 fazed.net
          1124 www.fark.com
          1271 www.g4tv.com
          1279 www.uniquepeek.com
          1391 reddit.com
          1951 www.google.com
          2197 www.fazed.net
          2244 www.flabber.nl
          2487 i-am-bored.com
          2594 meneame.net
          8009 www.i-am-bored.com
        56796 slashdot.org

    So far, 1,528,483 total hits, 10x more than my weekend average. The server seems like it's ho0lding up fine (any complaints?) -- THANK YOU, LMI.NET!

    Wendy

  37. Missed stop train story is fake.. by keepper · · Score: 1

    I cant believe these guys dont check this stuff..

    First, the are no overground trains that cross the hudson river, only the east river.. The closest one to the hudson are the amtrack bridge going grom riverdale into manhhatan, and the 1 subway line going from riverdale/kindsbridge to manhattan as well, over the spuyten devil channel that connects east and hudson rivers..

    And even if it had been one of these bridges.. ( one of the BMW east river bridges or one of the aforementioned two ).. they all have over hang.. and theres no way he would have falled in the river..

    PLUS.. i've lived in nyc for quite a bit.. never heard of this.

    1. Re:Missed stop train story is fake.. by Technician · · Score: 1

      On the other side of the continent, someone jumped over the guard rail on Interstate 84 in Oregon. Unfortunately, it was on a bridge. It was 50 feet down to the creekbed.

      Refrence.. Gladly

      http://www.kgw.com/news-local/stories/kgw_122906_n ews_samaritan_death.5f838aa0.html

      --
      The truth shall set you free!
  38. Re:And this years special goes to... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, I know, the 3000 weren't all this year, but what does it matter...

    yeah, keeping with the facts is something that should be simply overlooked.

    thanks for the hot tip there, retard

  39. Aren't the Darwin Awards... by east+coast · · Score: 1

    Aren't the Darwin Awards normally filled with facts that can't be verified and scientific inconsistencies?

    I'm not looking for a reason of why someone would do something stupid but it seems that just about half of the crap that normally gets credited to the Darwin Awards turns out to fall somewhere between technically impossible to incidents with no credible evidence.

    Or is this just people using the name "Darwin Awards" in association with any urban legend that involves vast quantities of idiocy?

    --
    Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
  40. Coffee has traditionally been common... by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    Boiling coffee has been a common way to server it for a very long time. In fact, that is the only way that a percolator works. I haven't taken apart a newer coffee machine, but I would strongly suspect that that is how they force the water up to the drip spout. Although I am assuming that we are referring the boiling to be before it was poured into a cup, as there is no way that the coffee would remain in a boiling state from the time that it was poured to the time it reached the customer.

    Irrelevant nitpick: "toxic" means that it is poisonous. It would be a large stretch to call burning someone with heat, a toxic injury.

  41. One more nominee please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would also like to nominate the UAL Customer Relations department for this award
    http://evilunitedairlines.blogspot.com/

  42. The smoking story - snubbed out - wrong moral? by nilbog · · Score: 1

    This story tells us: You shouldn't smoke with parafin all over you, because you could catch on fire. Shouldn't another darwin award go to everyone who smokes, gets cancer, and then dies because of it? It's the same situation: they were warned. It just took longer for the wax to catch on fire.

    --
    or else!
  43. Re:Favorite Darwin Award Classic & SNOPES by Technician · · Score: 1

    Check snopes.. it's a fake. The linked article also lists it as urban legend.

    --
    The truth shall set you free!
  44. Stubbed Out by tomzyk · · Score: 1
    The resulting inferno "cremated" his skin condition, and left first-degree burns on much of his body. Despite excellent treatment, he died in intensive care.

    So... he was engulfed in flames, only got 1st degree burns, and then died from it.

    Ummm... Wha??
    --
    Karma: NaN
    1. Re:Stubbed Out by stormy_petral · · Score: 1

      The amount of area affected is important, too. IANAD, but even though only first-degree, having such burns over nearly the entire body would represent a serious threat. One rule of thumb I have seen is that any burn larger than the palm of your hand (approx. 1% of your body surface area) should be seen by a doctor, regardless of burn degree.

  45. argh. by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

    Oops. Yes.

    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana