|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 2nd, 2003, 4:18pm A fascinating new quiz show has just started on BBC television in the UK. Its target audience is the section of society whose qualifications extend beyond a school leaver's certificate – which means it is, sadly, doomed to a minority of hardcore viewers. For your information, the Guardian Newspaper has written a short review of the programme: http://media.guardian.co.uk/bbc/story/0,7521,1009181,00.html Basically, it is a quick-fire comedy quiz show that challenges our general ignorance by asking ridiculously difficult questions, or questions which cause the spontaenous 'obvious', yet invariably wrong, answers. I'll post some of the more interesting, and controversial, questions as they appear. Feel free to make a fool of yourself by posting your 'answers'. :P 1. How many major planets are there in our solar system? 2. How many wives did Henry VIII have? 3. What is invisible and travels at about 38 miles per hour? 4. How many moons does the earth have? 5. Give a word, in the English language, that rhymes with purple? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 2nd, 2003, 8:15pm [1] I suppose this one depends on how you define "major planet". Does it refer only to gas giants, or do the terrestrials count as well? How about the snowball? There's a lot of debate over whether it ought to be included. Or maybe we are using the ancient definition of planet, in which the sun and moon count, but earth does not. Still, I like the traditional modern answer of 9 myself. [2] Last I heard the count was still 6. I suppose there is a matter here as well as to what constitutes a "wife" as opposed to a mistress. By the Roman Catholic church's count, I believe the number is "1", with 5 hussies. [3] Around here, air travels that fast regularly. Is that invisible enough for you? [4] A large and constantly varying number. How small does an object in orbit have to be before it is no longer considered a moon? [5] "gurple" n. : A made-up word used to provide an answer when none comes to mind. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 2nd, 2003, 11:41pm When is the show aired? It seems quite interesteing, and I can get BBC here.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 3rd, 2003, 3:34am It's aired on BBC2 on Thursday evenings at 10:00pm, UK time; the following week's show can be seen on BBC4 at 10:30pm on the same evening. The show is meant to be as contentious as much as it is amusing, so many of the answers are going to cause a lot of disagreement. The idea is not to take things too seriously; already people are writing to the BBC to assert the 'correct' answers – I think they miss the point of the show. One of the regular panelists, who is clearly very intelligent, is obtaining the reputation for giving the 'obvious' answer. When this happens on the show, a klaxxon is sounded and the (expected wrong) answer is displayed on a large screen, the contestant also loses 10 points. Poor Alan Davies has finished with a negative score on more than one occasion. So, Icarus, the klaxxon is sounding loud and clear for you... ::[hide] 1. The answer is 8; Pluto is no longer considered to be a major planet. 2. The answer is 3 or 4, depending on the authority you accept. I don't remember all the details (feel free to research and post links), but Henry's first wife was married to his brother, one marriage was never consummated, and another was never considered legal by the Catholic church. 3. Light! Apparently, light is no longer considered to travel at a constant speed; it travels at 186000 miles per second in a vacuum. However, light travels at about 38 mph in Sodium at -270oC. 4. Two; there is a second moon (I think it's called Cruithne) that follows a long orbit and is only visible for a short time every few hundred years. During that time, two moons will be visible at some point during the day. The next coincidence will be, unfortunately for us, beyond our lifetime. 5. Surple and gurple. I recall that 'gurple' means to drag a lame limb: to gurple along on crutches. I don't remember what 'surple' means. Anyone know? [/hide]:: Either I can post more as I remember or more shows are shown, or someone else in who has seen the show can post some questions. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 3rd, 2003, 8:30pm on 10/03/03 at 03:34:15, Sir Col wrote:
The International Astronomical Union is the official body for determination of such things. They still list Pluto as a major planet. Quote:
I am not a student of the English Monarchy, but I believe that only Catherine of Aragon's marriage to Henry VIII is recognized by the Roman Catholic Church. She was married to Henry's brother Arthur first, but he died before her marriage to Henry. I have never heard of a European religious or civil injuction against such marriages (after all, in the Old Testament there were times when a man was required to marry his brother's widow). The official count by English law, which surely must apply here, is either the traditional 6, or 5 (I'm not sure if there are exceptions available for the unconsummated one). Quote:
Light was NEVER considered to travel at constant speed in that sense. Before the nature of light was pinned down enough to consider such a thing, Fermat postulated that the refraction of light was caused by its traveling through differing materials at different speeds. Your result is also out-of-date. Light has not only been slowed, it has been stopped. It is possible to convert photons into standing waves in Bose-Einstein condensates. Last, one could argue that light is not invisible. Certainly it isn't unless it is ultraviolet or infrared. Air on the other hand is usually invisible around here, and the wind often reaches 38 mph. So I say my answer is better. Quote:
Interesting. I had never heard of Cruithne (http://www.astro.queensu.ca/~wiegert/3753/3753.html) before. That is one weird orbit. However it is co-orbiting with Earth, not orbiting around the Earth, so it is NOT a moon! On the other hand, the word "moon" is used to describe any natural celestrial body orbiting a planet. By this definition, as I said earlier, Earth has thousands of tiny moons. Quote:
I can't find a single dictionary that recognizes either one of them. Google turns up ~150 entries for gurple, and ~240 for surple. But all the gurple entries (I only sampled them) appear to be made-up words. Surple appears to be a word made up by songsmith Roger Miller to rythm with purple: "They say roses are red and violets are purple. Sugar's sweet and so is maple surple." (From Dang Me) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Oct 10th, 2003, 7:28am on 10/02/03 at 16:18:27, Sir Col wrote:
There's a similar show in Germany, called Genial daneben (http://www.sat1.de/genialdaneben/) ("resourcefully off target" or whatever; link in German). I don't remember when it first aired, but the producer said he'd been proposing the show to various broadcasting companies for a while, I think. Anyway, the target audience is no particular section of society and there are no points awarded. It's basically just for the fun of wrong, but more or less well-justified, answers. Quite often the five people in the panel guess or know the correct answer, but then again, the questions aren't really from another world. From the second season on, only questions sent in by viewers are used. So the concept is different, but it's a lot of fun, as there are usually very well-known (German, of course) comedians in the panel. Questions often deal with German sayings, but here are some others to give you an impression (please don't blame me for the sometimes rather debatable wording): 1. How does the king penguin incubate his eggs? 2. Why is the Zugspitze (highest mountain in Germany, on the border to Austria) 27cm higher when viewed from Germany than from Austria? 3. Why were dead cows blown up with dynamite in Vorarlberg (a federal state in Austria) until recently? 4. Why can you be on time to the minute, but still be late at a certain place on Rügen (largest German island)? 5. Why does Germany not have a constitution, but a "Grundgesetz"? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 10th, 2003, 8:48am It seems that is much more the line that this show has taken now. Rather than ask questions with wrong, but invariably obvious and contentious, answers, they've gone for more of the, "you can't possibly know the answer, but please entertain us with your embarrassing demonstration of ignorance" type questions. I know number 1, and I can guess at 2 and 3: 1. [hide]They incubate their eggs on their feet, so that they can still move around[/hide]. 2. [hide]The average height (above sea level) of Deutschland is 27 cm higher than the average height of Österreich[/hide]? 3. [hide]Was this an extreme measure to ensure that any cattle that died of unknown causes, and which might be infected with foot and mouth disease, would not be used as meat[/hide]? By the way, the words that rhyme with purple are hurple (sometimes spelt, hirple), and curple. Here are a few more: 6. What is unique about Costa Rica's army? 7. Why does the Spanish army not have any Alsatian/German Shepherd dogs? 8. What sound does the largest frog in the world make? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Oct 10th, 2003, 11:36am Sir Col, your answer for number one is correct, I also knew that before the show. Your guess at 2. is more or less correct: Actually [hide]the height is measured with respect to the tide gauge in Amsterdam for Germany, but wrt the Triest gauge in the case of Austria[/hide]. The reason for the strange behaviour described in question three is not health-related. For the record, I didn't know the answers to numbers two to four - but of course I knew number 5. :) 6. I think I remember something like [hide]no (offical) army at all or no official funds[/hide] regarding Costa Rica, but I'm not sure that would be unique. 7. I didn't know it's remarkable that an army doesn't any of those dogs. 8. Maybe [hide]a loud one, or none at all[/hide]? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 10th, 2003, 11:37am on 10/10/03 at 08:48:25, Sir Col wrote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 12th, 2003, 9:45am Actually, towr, what makes Costa Rica's army unique is [hide]that they are the only country in the world not to have an army; in 1949 a new constitution proscribed it[/hide]. With an answer like, "loud one, or none at all", wowbagger, you're bound to get it right! ;) I found the frog question one of the most interesting... ::[hide] The (wrong) obvious answer was, "ribbit". It turns out the Goliath frog, the largest frog in the world, makes no noise at all. Of the several thousand species of frogs in the world, only one makes the 'ribbit' sound; it is called the Southern Pacific Tree frog. The reason we now associate the 'ribbit' noise with a frog is because it is native to the area of North America around Hollywood studios. [/hide]:: As we're highly unlikely to get the Alsatian dog question about the Spanish army... ::[hide] The Spanish army requires all of its recruits to have a minimum IQ of 70. I'm not sure how they measure it, but the average IQ of an Alsatian dog is 60. [/hide]:: I'd love to know if they have any other breeds of dogs in the Spanish army?! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 12th, 2003, 2:11pm on 10/12/03 at 09:45:16, Sir Col wrote:
::[hide]Frankly I don't know if they don't have an army, but I'll buy it for the moment. More important though is that I'm pretty sure that there are other countries without an army, so Costa Rica can't be unique in this respect. Furthermore I don't think something can be unique by virtue of not existing. Many 'things' don't exist (which is paradoxical as well, since something isn't a thing if it doesn't exist.) On the other hand, logically speaking, 'Costa Rica's army' is an empty domain (not existing and all), and so any statement about it is true..[/hide]:: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Oct 14th, 2003, 8:51am I agree with towr regarding the Costa Rica army. If I remember correctly, [hide]Iceland doesn't have an army either[/hide]. However, [hide]they have a coastguard and supposedly even fired at the English during the cod wars[/hide]. on 10/12/03 at 09:45:16, Sir Col wrote:
;D Quote:
Actually, the German frogs make some sound like "quack" (with a long (German) a). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 16th, 2003, 4:04pm I must correct my statement about Costa Rica's army: [hide]they are the only country that prohibits an army from its constitution[/hide]. Here are a few more to chew over... 9. How is it that ducks have killed more people than nuclear bombs? 10. How many legs does a centipede have? 11. Who discovered Australia? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 16th, 2003, 11:25pm on 10/16/03 at 16:04:07, Sir Col wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
Y'know, I found yesterdays show slightly annoying, the presenter almost didn't let anyone else get a word in edgewise.. If he wanted to do a one man show he shouldn't invite the other four people.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 17th, 2003, 3:52am I think a rethink on number 9 is needed: [hide]just over one-hundred thousand people were killed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima[/hide]. Number 10 is interesting: [hide]as you pointed out, no centipede has ever been found with exactly one-hundred legs. What can be said for certain is that the number of legs is always even. Interestingly, in 1999, a centipede was discovered with 96 legs; this is the only ever recorded case for which the centipede had an even number of pairs (48). All other centipedes have an odd number of pairs of legs[/hide]. Number 11 is probably well known to most people now, anyway: [hide]firstly, James Cook was not a captain when he 'discovered' Australia. However, the most important fact is that the Chinese discovered Australia in the ninth century. In the fifteenth century they produced maps of the continent; the same maps that Cook and the crew used, in 1770, to navigate to Australia. If, on the other hand, we argue that he was the first European, then we must not forget, William Dampier, who visited the continent 80 years ealier[/hide]. Another interesting 'fact' is that the Aboriginal people came from what is now Italy. They are thought to have been native to Australia for around forty thousand years. They would have travelled there originally when the continental plates of Asia and Australasia were joined. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Oct 17th, 2003, 5:56am on 10/17/03 at 03:52:22, Sir Col wrote:
Your objection is not necessarily ruling out towr's suggestion. Over the centuries, ducks may well have choked thousands of people. Anyway, I guess you're after the answer: [hide]It's because ducks haven't killed any nuclear bombs[/hide]. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 17th, 2003, 8:21am on 10/17/03 at 03:52:22, Sir Col wrote:
Also Europe has only been populated by modern man for 20 or 30 thousand years or so, not enough time to get to australia and live there 40 thousand years.. (Of course the time-frames may well come from different sources which disagree) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 18th, 2003, 4:27am I'm not sure how 'factual' it is; how sure are any of us of 'facts' these days? I mentioned it because I was reminded about it by something said in QI; coincidentally I read it recently too. I know that the word, aborigine, from Latin, ab+origine, means 'from (distant time) origin/birth', and was first used in Latium, Italy, to refer to the original inhabitants. The Aborigines were a mythical people from this region; you can read a little about it here: http://en2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aborigines Here are a couple more... 12. What are the four official languages of Switzerland? 13. Which is the only language to have been used on Swiss stamps? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 18th, 2003, 10:03am on 10/18/03 at 04:27:23, Sir Col wrote:
And Aboriginals (not Aborigines) is the term for the original inhabitants of australia.. Quote:
Quote:
It's latin[/hide]:: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 18th, 2003, 6:53pm The reason ducks have killed more people than nuclear bombs have: [hide]New flu viruses generally form in populations of fowls. Influenza has killed many millions of people.[/hide] Concerning Australian Aborigines - having a latin name does not mean they themselves came from Italy. Also, there has been no land connection between Australia and other continents since it broke with South America (Okay - I'm not sure about Antartica). The aborigines had to arrive in boats. Not an impossible trip, particularly during an Ice Age when ocean levels were lower. One other tidbit: Genetic information indicates that there is a genetic spectrum with Africans at one end and Australian aborigines at the other. Everyone else falls somewhere in the middle, pretty much according to theories about what lands along the arc connecting this two locations their ancestors came from. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 19th, 2003, 7:27am on 10/18/03 at 18:53:55, Icarus wrote:
It helps that ducks have been around millions of years longer than nuclear weapons as well.. And of course there's their nefarious plot to overthrow humanity and all that ;) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 19th, 2003, 12:17pm on 10/18/03 at 10:03:04, towr wrote:
Actually, as a noun, the word aborigine is now synonymous with aboriginal. However, the word aboriginal was originally the adjective form of aborigine. Through constant misuse, it has now become accepted as a noun; the word aborigine still remains exclusively a noun. As I mentioned in my second post, the show is a deliberate attempt to laugh in the face of common notions. It's more of an exercise in twisting the truth to see how far they can get away with it. Some people may object to this intellectual mockery, but to an intelligent viewer (and I'm sure that this is the exclusive audience anyway), they know more now than they did before. This is because we've had our database of learned 'facts' challenged, and we've been forced to research the credability of it for ourselves; en route we pick up other things we never knew before. The Australian aborigine question is a prime example. If you didn't know before, you now know: (i) the term aborigine applies to indigenous people in general, (ii) the word is taken from Latin and was first used in the Lazio region of Italy to refer to a mythical people, (iii) the shift of continental plates, tens of thousands of years ago, makes it very near impossible to talk about original inhabitants with any authority, and, (iv) Africans and Australian aborigines are as far apart genetically as the human race allows; thanks for that last bit, Icarus, that's QI. ;) By the way, good answers on the others. And I know what you mean about ducks, towr – I've never trusted those feathery fiends! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 19th, 2003, 9:13pm on 10/19/03 at 12:17:50, Sir Col wrote:
No - the continental shifts were long before the beginning of human history. When the Aborigines arrived, Australia was roughly the same as it is now. There is still shifting going on, but it is measured in inches per year, so the process is extremely slow. My point was that the Aborigines arrived by boat from Indonesia. There was never a land bridge connecting Australia to the Asian mainland. We know this because of the relatively few non-marsupial mammals on the continent before the arrival of Europeans. Those that were there are assumed to have come with the Aborigines. Had there ever been a land bridge, the continent would have many relatives of the fauna of Indonesia, but it doesn't. The closest relatives to the native mammals of Australia are to be found in the Americas. I'm not sure if Asia/Europe/Africa still have any native marsupials at all. In the Americas, there are a few. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 20th, 2003, 12:45am I wasn't suggesting that the planet was a continuous surface. Rather, the lands would have been sufficiently close for small sea journeys. on 10/19/03 at 21:13:25, Icarus wrote:
Only those born in zoos. :P The term native is interesting: it comes from the Latin, natus, meaning, to be born. However, the common notion is something that originates from there, but in what form?; common notions deceive us. ;) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 23rd, 2003, 3:28pm I'm back with more questions and, no doubt, highly controversial answers... 1. What is the biological definition of a bug? 2. Which word takes up most room in the Oxford English Dictionary? 3. On average, how much do finger nails grow after you die? 4. What do bananas grow on? 5. What is titi and a lili? 6. Who coined the phrase, "Survival of the fittest?" |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 23rd, 2003, 5:53pm Okay, I'll bite the bait again, though you're going to get all nitpicky, I'm sure! >:( 1. What is the biological definition of a bug? I don't believe "bug" is an actual scientific term. It generally is applied to all insects and arachnids, plus some other related classes. But that is the best I can do. 2. Which word takes up most room in the Oxford English Dictionary? I would guess, something like "is" or "and", or maybe "do". Small irregular and very common words require a considerable amount of attention to define completely. Often they cannot be defined without using them in the definition! 3. On average, how much do finger nails grow after you die? Presumably, not long after you die, the cells in your body find themselves starved for appropriate nurishment and they all die as well. Some nail growth is possible before this occurs, but I have never been goulish enough to try and measure it! 4. What do bananas grow on? Well - they've never grown on me! I've not been fond of them since I got a bad one when I was 3 or 4. However, I think that I can assert with some authority that they grow on banana plants! ;) 5. What is titi and a lili? >:(As this forum has children who visit regularly, I must ask you to refrain from using such language in the future! >:( ;) 6. Who coined the phrase, "Survival of the fittest?" I would guess that the first answer that comes to mind is wrong. So a search of Bartlett's "Familiar Quotations" turns up: [hide]Herbert Spencer[/hide]. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 24th, 2003, 1:46am on 10/23/03 at 15:28:00, Sir Col wrote:
Quote:
Did you know gullible isn't in the Oxford english dictionary? [hide] such a nice trick to play on people.. And some are gullible enough to fall for it. Like QI's presenter.. that was funny.. [/hide] Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'd blame Gould, simply because I don't like his work..[/hide]:: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Oct 24th, 2003, 4:00am on 10/23/03 at 17:53:49, Icarus wrote:
According to what I found, bug (hermiptera) is the technical term for an order of insects, consisting of the suborders heteroptera (apparently also called bugs; two families) and homoptera (two families, among them the cicadina). towr, nice self-referential definition! Quote:
Looking at how the question is phrased, I think the intended meaning might be to not only count the definition of the word itself, but also the space it takes up in other words' definitions. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 24th, 2003, 11:11am 1. towr is correct: a 'bug' is a scientific term for insects that have piecing or sucking mouth parts: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemiptera 2. Icarus and wowbagger have picked up on one of the possible (and deliberate) interpretations I intended: the word that takes up most room is the word that appears most often throughout the dictionary. However, the question I was really asking was, "Which definition takes up the most room in the OED?" 3. I think you got this one: due to dehydration of the cells surrounding the fingernails, they skin retracts giving the impression of growth, but in reality they stop growing when you die. 4. Spot on! Bananas grow on a plant, not a tree. In fact they are a 'treelike' herb. Another bizzare fact is that banana plants walk; the average plant 'walks' 40 cm each year! 5. Icarus, I don't know what you're thinking of! ;) I posted both words together, because they're related. A titi is a name for a South American monkey with long fur, but titi and lili together relate to... 6. Perfect answer, Icarus! It turns out that Herbert Spencer was a business man and inventor of the paper clip. The phrase, "survival of the fittest," did not appear in the original versions of Darwin's Origin of Species. However, he did adopt it in later editions. So, you've still to discover which definition takes up most room in the OED, and work out what lili and titi are. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 24th, 2003, 3:25pm My answers were intentionally unresearched (with the exception of Spencer). And if you look again at my answer to (2), you will see that I was refering to space taken up by the definition only. It was a guess, and a broad one, since all I could do was give the type of word. Was something wrong with towr's answer of "set"? I admit if it is correct, then my statement was wrong. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 24th, 2003, 5:12pm Oops! No, there's nothing wrong with towr's answer; I missed it. With regards your interpretation, I am genuinely intrigued. On the show they asked the question, "Which definition takes up the most space?"; and towr has identified it correctly as, set. However, I wonder which word appears (i) most often throughout the dictionary, and, (ii) in any one definition? Icarus, your attempt to answer the questions without research is the spirit in which one should answer them: that is how the contestants on the show face the questions. Once an 'answer' has been presented, it is certainly interesting to research its validity. So what about titis and lilis? Feel free to research this one; without a particular relevant keyword, you'll struggle to get it. If no one can find it, you get bored, or can't be bothered, I'll post the answer. ;) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by BNC on Oct 25th, 2003, 2:49am Using wowbagger's interpretation, I would like to suggest either of: Space, Ink, Paper. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 30th, 2003, 3:11pm Here's another batch of impossibly difficult questions from the quiz show... 1. Saturn's rings are about 170,000 miles wide, on average, but what is the average thickness? 2. Who was the first king of England? 3. What is considered to be the most dangerous living creature in the world, and why? 4. According to the Bible, who cut-off Samson's hair? Plus one you've still not got... 5. What is titi and a lili? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 30th, 2003, 5:54pm 1. Saturn's rings are about 170,000 miles wide, on average, but what is the average thickness? I could look this up, but I vaguely remember a number of about [hide]10 miles[/hide]. But that memory is so vague, I would not be surprised if it's wrong. 2. Who was the first king of England? This one I did research a little on, to find a name to put on my idea, since I have no more memorized lists of British Royalty than you have American Presidents. I say: [hide]King Cerdic (1st) of Britain (467-534 AD), because - if my research is correct (a big if!) - he came over from the continent with the Anglo-Saxons. You can't have an "England" before the "English" arrive![/hide] 3. What is considered to be the most dangerous living creature in the world, and why? ::[hide]That depends on your definitions of both "dangerous" and of "living". I would say the flu virus has got to be one of the top killers of humans, if not the top. Of course, we do a fairly good job of it ourselves.[/hide]:: 4. According to the Bible, who cut-off Samson's hair? Since the obvious answer is apparently the wrong one, I racked my brain and finally recalled the correct answer, which is: [hide]"And she [Delilah] made him sleep on her knees, and called for a man and had him shave off the seven locks of his hair. Then she began to afflict him, and his strength left him." Judges 16:20.[/hide] I would still call Delilah culpable for the act, however. 5. What is [censored] and a [censored]? Really now! MUST you keep up this shocking behavior? :o ;) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 30th, 2003, 10:58pm on 10/30/03 at 15:11:20, Sir Col wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 31st, 2003, 3:31am The "thickness of Saturn's rings" question seems a little unclear, if you do some research. In the programme they claimed they were around 350 feet, but I've found answers (on the internet) ranging from 30 feet to 10 miles. I thought that these links were fairly credible: http://hubblesite.org/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=11&cat=solarsystem http://science.nasa.gov/headlines/y2002/13dec_saturn.htm You're spot on with Samson, [hide]Lilis and Titis[/hide] (hidden from Icarus' sensitive eyes), and you're close with the king of England. The 'obvious' answer was King Alfred the Great, but he was only king of Wessex. It seems that there is division over this question. Some say, Egbert I, others say, Ethelwulf (Egbert's son); interestingly, Alfred was Ethelwulf's son. As for the most dangerous living creature, I can tell you that it is thought that just over one-half of the entire humans race has been killed by this creature. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 1st, 2003, 8:38am Some good links. I'm really looking forward to next July. I remember the amazement that resulted from the Voyager flyby. The waves, spokes, and braids were entirely unexpected (maybe the waves were) as were the small sheparding moons. There was also amazement to learn that the rings were made up of thousands of individual bands, rather than the few broad bands that we thought composed them. Of all the space probes, I think Voyager 2 remains the champ for turning our previous understandings on their head. If nothing else (though there is sure to be a lot else), Cassini should shed a little more light on the many questions that Voyager raised. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 1st, 2003, 10:00am on 10/31/03 at 03:31:40, Sir Col wrote:
Either way I wouldn't define dangerous as just 'dangerous to humans'.. It's a problamatic statement anyway. I'd find a living T-rex standing in front of me a lot more dangerous than a vial of plague or ebola.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by maryl on Nov 2nd, 2003, 2:38pm Wouldn't the most dangerous living creature be [hide]man[/hide]? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 2nd, 2003, 2:48pm Interpreting "Dangerous" to mean "Dangerous for humans" (which I did intentionally in my first post on this issue), as I said before, we do a really bang-up job of killing ourselves. But I don't think we hold a candle to the murderous capacity of some disease-inducing bacteria or viruses. Perhaps the bacterium that causes Cholera? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 2nd, 2003, 3:07pm Well, I can't really say cholera is all that dangerous to me.. Being in a relatively rich country helps a lot to take it's danger away.. Other people are probably the most dangerous animals here, moreso I'm probably the most dangerous creature to myself.. Since most people kill themself by their bad habits around here, afaik. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by maryl on Nov 2nd, 2003, 3:11pm Hm, sorry I just noticed that. I was also thinking viruses, or maybe the sea or something along that line. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 2nd, 2003, 3:36pm Generally virusses aren't considered to be alive though. And the sea only metaphorically, so I doubt that would count here. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 2nd, 2003, 4:13pm All of your reasoning is sound to me. As I'm not convinced of the answer they gave, I'll post it; it'd be good if we could research to find corroborative evidence. The answer they proposed was, [hide]____the mosquito____[/hide]. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by otter on Nov 3rd, 2003, 1:42pm on 11/01/03 at 08:38:48, Icarus wrote:
If you haven't been to the site before, I highly recommend the Astronomy Picture of the Day (APOD) at http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html. Great pictures of the cosmos, plus a searchable index. If you search on Saturn or Cassini, you'll get some interesting photos of the planet and some previous ones as Cassini approaches the planet. You can also visit the Cassini site at NASA at http://saturn.jpl.nasa.gov/index.cfm. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by maryl on Nov 3rd, 2003, 2:23pm on 11/02/03 at 16:13:10, Sir Col wrote:
Well that's something, I thought of that, but half of mankind? I hadn't figured it that bad yet, but give it time. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 3rd, 2003, 4:51pm on 11/02/03 at 15:36:06, towr wrote:
That is a subject of some debate. Viruses lie at the limits of our definition of life. Which side of that fence they should be placed on is an open question. However, bacteria are most definitely living creatures, and it is bacteria that cause many of the world's most deadly illnesses, including cholera. However, it would hardly be fair to treat all bacteria as a single type of creature, any more than you would refer to "vertebrates" as a candidate for most dangerous creature. This is why I suggested the particular bacillum that causes cholera, since that disease is a nasty killer in much of the world. It would not surprise me to learn that half of humanity has succumbed to it. Fortunately that situation has seen a major improvement in recent decades. Not just from improved sanitation, but also from treatment strategies suited to third world conditions. on 11/02/03 at 16:13:10, Sir Col wrote:
I suppose mosquitos could be seen as the greater killers, since they pass on several different types of diseases. Still, I'm not so sure they can be credited with half of mankind. Otter - thanks for the links. It would be nice if the Cassini mission got the sort of coverage that Voyager 2 did, but alas, the public seems to be less interested in the results of space probes these days. Still, the internet gives those of us who are interested far greater access to the data than we had back then, when most of us had to rely on the media for everything. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 6th, 2003, 4:46pm More controversy... ;) 1. Who invented the aeroplane? 2. Why would someone have 'mad bad fat sad old git' on their suitcase? 3. Was banning smoking on aircraft a good idea? 4. In 1847, two years before his death, Edgar Allan Poe wrote a poem prose, called Eureka. What did it predict? 5. Who was the first man to circumnavigate the globe? 6. What was the nationality of the inventor of the helicopter? 7. What did you risk if you sucked a pencil? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Speaker on Nov 6th, 2003, 5:50pm 2. [hide] If they had traveled to places that are abbreviated in that way[/hide] 3. [hide] Yes[/hide] 6. [hide] Russian [/hide] 7. [hide] Being considered oral retentive by your peers [/hide] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 6th, 2003, 6:06pm 1. Who invented the aeroplane? A matter of definition here. What do you mean by "invent" and by "aeroplane"? If you mean the first to build a device demonstrated to be capable of carrying a human passenger for a powered flight, then Wilbur & Orville have it. Any number of other interpretations allow in lesser mortals! ;) Or perhaps with your "aeroplane" instead of "airplane", you mean another speaker of your own version of our common language? ::) 2. Why would someone have 'mad bad fat sad old git' on their suitcase? For me, that would be "truth in advertising". At least on a moody day! ;) 3. Was banning smoking on aircraft a good idea? Dr. Parker, my dissertation advisor and a chain smoker, was adamant about this one! He claimed that with the ban on smoking, airlines started using fewer oxygen bottles during flights, so the overall air quality actually got worse. Not being a smoker (you should have seen us during my visits to his office - I would always crowd as far back into the corner as I could, in hopes of avoiding the worst of it), I am less sure of the accuracy of this claim. (Less oxygen bottles, sure - but you need more data than that to say that the air quality was worse.) 4. In 1847, two years before his death, Edgar Allan Poe wrote a poem prose, called Eureka. What did it predict? Vacuum cleaners? 5. Who was the first man to circumnavigate the globe? Well, if you want historically documented circumnavigation, I assume it would be whoever it was who took over after Magellan died. I'm assuming he would reserve the right for himself to be first off the ship and stand on the same spot of land that he had before the trip. (any other definition of "first" applying for all we know to any and/or every body on board). 6. What was the nationality of the inventor of the helicopter? Same rant about "invent" and "helicopter". The first to make hand-spun flying rotor toys were the Chinese. The first powered helicopter capable of lifting a human was the work of Frenchman Paul Cornu in 1907. The first commercial production helicopter was of course the work of Sikorsky, who had imigrated to America from Russia in 1917. [e]I am not sure, but believe he was a naturalized American by his helicopter building days, so we lay claim to him! ;)[/e] 7. What did you risk if you sucked a pencil? Dorkism. Alas, I more than risked it. :'( |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by BNC on Nov 6th, 2003, 10:59pm 7. What did you risk if you sucked a pencil? Originally, pencil leads were made of, well, lead. Then, you cound probably be poisoned by long sucking of pencils. Today, though, it's synthetic. Therefore, I guess the worst rosk is someone playing football (real football, played with the feet) kicking a ball at you, hitting the pencil, and causing it to emerge from the other side of your head (ouch!). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by william wu on Nov 6th, 2003, 11:40pm on 11/06/03 at 16:46:47, Sir Col wrote:
Hmm, no idea. All this reminds me of is "Victory Drill". I don't know if anyone can relate, but I attended an elementary school that employed an ancient "Victory Drill" instruction, which essentially asked the student to read as many rhyme words as possible under a short time limit. Each page of our Victory Drill book was a sea of word lists; on the elementary chapters you would have one syllable rhyme words such as: "mad had rad sad pad lad dad cad bad ..." and on later chapters you had the multisyllabic ones: "rotation fixation gyration floatation sensation hydration inflation narration negation probation ...". Incidentally I was a real maniac with this stuff and won all the top prizes. Later though, when teachers asked me to read aloud in class, I was so conditioned to read insanely fast that everyone would crack up. I guess this has nothing to do with the problem at hand but I thought I'd share my little story :) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 7th, 2003, 2:04am on 11/06/03 at 16:46:47, Sir Col wrote:
Quote:
Or because someone else put it one.. Also, as a joke answer so someone else won't steal it. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by wowbagger on Nov 7th, 2003, 5:19am 2. Just for the sake of completeness: [hide]MAD - Madrid (Barajas), Spain BAD - Barksdale Air Force Base, USA FAT - Fresno Air Terminal, USA SAD - Safford Municipal Airport, USA OLD - Old Town (Dewitt Field), USA GIT - Geita, Tanzania [/hide] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by otter on Nov 7th, 2003, 6:11am on 11/06/03 at 16:46:47, Sir Col wrote:
I'm not sure that Poe predicted them, but his essay descibed what are now known as ::[hide] Black Holes [/hide]:: Were the succession of stars endless, then the background of the sky would present us an uniform luminosity, like that displayed by the Galaxy - since there could be absolutely no point, in all that background, at which would not exist a star. The only mode, therefore, in which, under such a state of affairs, we could comprehend the voids which our telescopes find in innumerable directions, would be by supposing the distance of the invisible background so immense that no ray from it has yet been able to reach us at all. - Eureka Check out other Poe quotes on the cosmos at http://www.bo.astro.it/~cappi/poequot.html [edited to include Poe quote and URL] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 7th, 2003, 8:57am I think #1 has been answered comprehensively. As Icarus stated, the first manned flight was the Wright brothers, although they travelled no further than the wingspan of the plane. However, as towr, mentioned, it was some English git. So as to distinguish him from all other English gits, he went by the name of John Stringfellow. Apparently (any sentence that starts with that word must be suspect), he invented the concept of flight and demonstrated it by use of a model plane. I wonder about inventing the concept of flight, and I'm sure Aero_guy can ajudicate this, but apparently (there it is again), no one actually knows how a plane stays in the air. There are five different theories of aerodynamics. It is thought that by 2010, the current legal minimum crew of three men will be reduced to one man and a dog. Technology will have advanced so far that the plane will practically fly itself. The man will be there to feed the dog and the dog will only be there to bite the man if he tries to touch any of the controls. ;D Thanks, wowbagger, for furnishing us with the corresponding airports. You can have fun, at this link, by typing in 3-letter words to see if they correspond to actual airports: http://www.ar-group.com/icaoiata.htm Fukuoka, in Japan, has an interesting one. ;) I found #3 quite interesting. Apparently (here we go again), before smoking was banned, the cabin air was completely recycled every 3 minutes. The smoking ban has meant that airplane companies save about 6% on fuel costs. The result to passengers, apart from the impression that they're breathing 'cleaner' air, is that there are increased levels of CO[sub]2[/sup], less than half the required fresh air for optimum comfort, and it is now believed that the reduced air quality accounts for the increase in 'air-rage' occurrences on flights. I've not read Eureka, but the programme claimed that it predicted: the Big Bang theory, general relativity, parallel universes, and the structure of the atom? Icarus was spot on with the first man to circumnavigate the globe. Magellan died half-way round, in the Philippines. It was the second in command, Jose Sebastian del Cano, that officially takes the credit as the first man to captain a ship that circumnavigated the globe. Are we still awake? towr was right about it not being Italian (Leonardo da Vinci), and a couple guessed that the Chinese were the first. In the 4th century AD, they invented a device called the Bamboo Dragon, which is considered to be the first 'helicopter'. The jury is still out for me on the last one, but apparently, pencils never have contained lead; it is a complete myth? As I've said before, please don't shoot the messenger, but I'd love to hear your thoughts on some of these. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 7th, 2003, 9:47pm I think the concept of flight has been around a lot longer than this Stringfellow. I seem to remember something about a couple of French men and a bag of hot air... Well "french" and "hot air" go hand-in-hand, so it is not surprising they did that one first. And yes - pencils have never contained lead. Even the softest of leads requires a very hard surface to leave a mark. Paper doesn't cut it. Pencil leads are made out of a graphite-clay mixture. They were originally made from a naturally occuring deposit (I believe in England, but only vaguely). This deposit had a lead-like color, and so the name came about. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 7th, 2003, 9:58pm on 11/07/03 at 06:11:40, otter wrote:
That description has absolutely nothing to do with black holes. I haven't followed the link yet to see what else Poe said, but the argument presented here is only for the universe to be of finite age. I'm not sure when such arguments were first put forward in scientific circles, but I doubt Poe can claim to be the originator. That the universe had a beginning is also considerably short of the Big Bang theory. After all, many people have said the same thing since antiquity. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by maryl on Nov 8th, 2003, 7:51am 7. I would say you risked making a mistake since the eraser on the end of the pencil wouldn't work too well. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by otter on Nov 9th, 2003, 3:05pm on 11/07/03 at 21:58:02, Icarus wrote:
You are right, Icarus. That quote more correctly describes Poe's thoughts on the big bang and the size of the universe. My bad. I don't even claim to understand much of Poe's discourse in Eureka. The following, from http://www.poedecoder.com/essays/eureka/#universe1 implies that Poe spoke of what was later to be known as black holes. Whether Poe's decription of black holes is accurate or or simply wishful reading of Eureka by some well-meainging interpreter, I can't attest to. ...Poe states that God created matter from His spirit. The matter originally assumed its simplest form, without distinct kind, character, nature, size, or form. This primary particle comprised Oneness, which Poe believed to be the "natural" condition of the universe. Poe's Monos, Una, and Israfel are spiritual manifestations of this unified state of being. However, for reasons unknown, the primary particle was willed by God into the "abnormal condition of Many." Atoms irradiated in all directions, spherically creating/occupying space. Because of gravity and according to their proximity, the irradiated atoms coalesced, later becoming suns, galaxies, planets, moons, and other cosmic debris. Finally, differentiation of particles by size, kind, form, character, and nature became possible, awaiting only the dualistic mind required to perceive the differentiations. Today's astro-physicists speak more specifically in their discussion of particles than did Poe, who merely speaks of atoms; but the process of the irradiating universe is the same. Very important is Poe's idea that the normal condition of the universe can be achieved only in the unity of the primary particle. As a result, all matter longs to return to that which gave it birth. The force which compels all matter to return to simpler forms is gravity. Because of gravity, all atoms lump together in the most comfortable posture possible until the particle proper is completely reassembled. Even before the primary particle becomes completely reassembled, aggregations of "various unique masses" (Harrison 210) are possible, each mass assuming the characteristics of the original One. Today scientists call these particles black holes. They constitute energy and matter in their undifferentiated form, possessing gravity so great that not even light can escape from them. Poe is also credited as the first person on record to solve Olbers Paradox http://zebu.uoregon.edu/~imamura/123/lecture-5/olbers.html. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 9th, 2003, 6:16pm I think I would call the interpreter "self-deluding" rather than "well-meaning". "Well-meaning" to me requires some effort on the part of the person to "do no harm". On in this case, to tell no lies. Someone who deludes themselves this badly fails that test. The only thing Poe's "oneness" has in common with a black hole even by their supposition is "undifferentiated matter". This is a far cry from Poe predicting black holes. Even if it were not so, it is also false. The matter in a black hole is not "undifferentiated". Indeed, we have no way to say what goes on on the other side of an event horizon. But even on this side, Black holes have some properties that can be measured: Mass, Charge, Angular momentum, and at least one other that does not come to mind right now. Also, we now know that black holes radiate (more accurately: we theorize - experimental evidence concerning black holes is slim and often subject to alternative explanation.) Just because Poe described a fanciful concept that bares a faint superficial correlation with one or two aspects of black holes is no reason to credit him as first to suggest them. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 13th, 2003, 3:56pm Another barrel load of questions with equally questionable answers... 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? 2. Why wouldn't pigeons enjoy the movies? 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? 5. What grows if a Golden delicious apple falls to the ground and takes root? 6. What is the largest living thing on the planet? 7. Who was the first man to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun? 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? 9. Who invented the telephone? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by crooked on Nov 13th, 2003, 4:09pm 9. Wasn't it Bell's assistant? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Speaker on Nov 13th, 2003, 4:43pm 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? Elmer Fudd, but closely followed by Charlie Brown. 2. Why wouldn't pigeons enjoy the movies? They have very short attention spans. Very. 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? Cleaning up after feasts. 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? An entrée at the feast. 5. What grows if a Golden delicious apple falls to the ground and takes root? An apple tree. 6. What is the largest living thing on the planet? The Rocky Mountains 7. Who was the first man to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun? It wasn’t a man, if memory serves, it was Miss Noreen Palodichuk, my fourth grade teacher. 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? Homo Sapiens, although the sapience part might be questioned. 9. Who invented the telephone? Was it Al Gore, or did he invent the Internet? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 13th, 2003, 8:13pm 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? That might depend on what exactly you include in the term "animal". If we go with land vertibrates, then probably it's some small creature like the shrew. 2. Why wouldn't pigeons enjoy the movies? My guess to an actual reason other than general obtuseness (for birds, pigeons are very smart - but that isn't saying much), would be that pigeon have faster response to changing illumination than we do, so they would actually see the images as flickering at the speed we normally run film at. 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? Life partners for soldier uncles? 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? Entertaining themselves when feeding foreigners "local cuisine". 5. What grows if a Golden delicious apple falls to the ground and takes root? I thought perhaps the golden delicious was a sterile hybrid, but a quick search of the history denies this. So I have to agree with Speaker. 6. What is the largest living thing on the planet? There is a fungus (in Michigan or Wisconsin, I believe) that is hundreds of miles across (it is mostly below ground). It is possible that someone has found a bigger one since I heard about it, but still a variety of fungus is probably the correct answer. 7. Who was the first man to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun? This is undoubtedly lost in antiquity. Now the first person RECORDED as suggesting it was some greek, I think. 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? Unless you count indirect deaths (such as rats carried the fleas that carried the Black Death, so rats killed a third of Europe), Speaker is clearly correct. "We have met the enemy, and he is us." 9. Who invented the telephone? While looking up some details in refutation of what I assumed to be a repeat of Elisha Grey's claim, I see that evidence is strong that Antonio Meucci (http://www.italianhistorical.org/MeucciStory.htm) had successfully translated sound into electrical signals and back again as early as 1849. It does seem like Meucci deserves the credit for first invention. But it seems to me that the claims of malfeasance in the article are overblown. In particular, legally Meucci was without recourse since he failed to obtain a patent before Bell's, and his caveat - announcement of intent - had been allowed to expire before Bell filed for his. Further, the other claims made would have required Bell to have had tremendous wealth and influence even before his own invention and patent. This is certainly not true. Maybe Bell did act improperly and supress Meucci claim of invention for reasons of fame. But I don't see that he needed to for economic reasons. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by BNC on Nov 14th, 2003, 12:13am 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? I seem to recall that bees have extremely large brain/body ratio. 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? Wild guess: Tattoos? 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? Yummy.. 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? Apart from humans, it's one of the great mammals -- elephants, rhinoceros, or hippopotamus. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 14th, 2003, 12:49am on 11/13/03 at 15:56:28, Sir Col wrote:
Quote:
Most animals have better things to do with their time.. Besides, they can't follow the plotline, and they're not very interested in (human) porn. What could possibly be interesting to them in a movie? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I've also recently heard something about a forest of trees that supposedly was actually one tree (they shared the rootsystem), but since it comes from a movie there's some concern about the validity.. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 14th, 2003, 4:48pm 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? Good guesses, but it turns out to be the ant: 6% of its body is brain. 2. Why wouldn't pigeons enjoy the movies? Spot on Icarus. It is necessary for film to run at 25 frames per second for humans to believe they are seeing motion. It has been calculated (and I have no idea how), that pigeons would require the film to run at 250 fps; at 25 fps, it would appear as a slide show to them. As a result they would watch a movie, like the Matrix, and wonder when something exciting was about to happen. I don't know if this explains why pigeons, sitting in the road, seem to react so late when we drive towards them in a car? 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? towr got it. They used to pinch the broken skin together and place the ant next to it. When the ant bites through the skin, they pull the ants body away from its body, leaving a 'stitch' in place. 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? Apparently, they place a number of red ants in an open wound and they begin to secrete an acid, which acts as a powerful alternative to antiseptic. 5. What grows if a Golden delicious apple falls to the ground and takes root? True, Speaker, an apple tree grows. However, they are among the most genetically diverse organisms, and as such, any tree grown from a seed will never be the same as the parent. To continue a variety it is necessary to use grafting methods. 6. What is the largest living thing on the planet? Icarus was almost correct; it is actually the Honey Mushroom. Biologists have discovered that this particular mushroom is a single organism connected underground. It is found in Malheur National Forest, Oregon, and it extends for over 2000 acres. 7. Who was the first man to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun? Again, good answer, Icarus. It was Aristarchus of Samos, circa 310 BCE. 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? BNC and towr got it; it is the Hippopotamus. The greatest irony is that despite their aggressive nature, they are herbivores. Once they've killed their victims they just leave them. 9. Who invented the telephone? Well played, Icarus, it was Antonio Meucci, in 1871. Apparently, Alexander Graham Bell was a young engineer working in the patent office at the time, and the conspiracy theory suggests that he stole the plans and patented it for himself. Boo to him, if it's true! Once again, I only report what they said on the programme, so please address all complaints to: QI, BBC Television Studios, London, England. ;D |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 14th, 2003, 9:36pm 1. Which animal has the largest brain to body ratio? Good guesses, but it turns out to be the ant: 6% of its body is brain. Again - it comes down to what you include in the word "animal". Are insects animals? It seems to me that the word is more commonly used for vertebrates. 2. Why wouldn't pigeons enjoy the movies? Spot on Icarus. It is necessary for film to run at 25 frames per second for humans to believe they are seeing motion. It has been calculated (and I have no idea how), that pigeons would require the film to run at 250 fps; at 25 fps, it would appear as a slide show to them. As a result they would watch a movie, like the Matrix, and wonder when something exciting was about to happen. I don't know if this explains why pigeons, sitting in the road, seem to react so late when we drive towards them in a car? Because the air flows around a car make it easier for birds to get into the air. They wait intentionally for the car to approach, then take off and ride the rushing air to gain added speed and height with less effort. I would also say that if a pigeon had a brain to understand it, they could follow the plot of the movie and it would be just as exciting to them, except that the jerky images would give them headaches. They do not experience time any faster than we do. Their eyes just respond quicker to illumination changes. 3. What did the people of ancient India use soldier ants for? towr got it. They used to pinch the broken skin together and place the ant next to it. When the ant bites through the skin, they pull the ants body away from its body, leaving a 'stitch' in place. And I thought stapling a wound shut sounded bad. 4. What do the people of Thailand still use red ants for? Apparently, they place a number of red ants in an open wound and they begin to secrete an acid, which acts as a powerful alternative to antiseptic. Maggots have been used for this as well. They will eat the dead tissue away, preventing necrosis. 5. What grows if a Golden delicious apple falls to the ground and takes root? True, Speaker, an apple tree grows. However, they are among the most genetically diverse organisms, and as such, any tree grown from a seed will never be the same as the parent. To continue a variety it is necessary to use grafting methods. That sounds to me like an overstatement of the case. You may get significant variations in a few generation, but if you control the fertilization, true-breeding strands can be grown from seeds. 6. What is the largest living thing on the planet? Icarus was almost correct; it is actually the Honey Mushroom. Biologists have discovered that this particular mushroom is a single organism connected underground. It is found in Malheur National Forest, Oregon, and it extends for over 2000 acres. I believe that information is way out of date. 2000 acres is fairly small compared to the size I recall hearing about several years ago. That fungus (I don't remember if it was mushroom or not - just that it was some type of fungus) was many miles across. 7. Who was the first man to suggest that the earth revolves around the sun? Again, good answer, Icarus. It was Aristarchus of Samos, circa 310 BCE. Again, he may be the first we have record of, but I sincerely doubt he was the first to come up with the idea. 8. Which mammal is responsible for killing most humans in Africa each year? BNC and towr got it; it is the Hippopotamus. The greatest irony is that despite their aggressive nature, they are herbivores. Once they've killed their victims they just leave them. Now that is just plain wrong! Hippos kill a pittance compared to we humans ourselves. In fact, more humans are killed anywhere by other humans than by all other animals put together. Last I knew, humans are still mammals. Girls are not hiding tennis balls (or basketballs, depending on the woman) under their blouses! 9. Who invented the telephone? Well played, Icarus, it was Antonio Meucci, in 1871. Apparently, Alexander Graham Bell was a young engineer working in the patent office at the time, and the conspiracy theory suggests that he stole the plans and patented it for himself. Boo to him, if it's true! Meucci may have been first to come up with a telephone (and in 1849, not 1871), but this bit about Bell is completely bogus! I don't believe he ever worked in the patent office. His invention of the telephone came from his work with the deaf. He invented a device in 1871 that converted sound into mechanical motion, in hopes that deaf people could see what they could not hear. Thoughts about this device and its output were what gave him the idea. If Bell had stolen plans from Meucci and used them, then his patent would have been considerably different. For instance, Meucci used inductance to boost his signal. This idea was not rediscovered until the 1890s, and was patented (not by Bell) in 1900. Lastly, Meucci did not file for a patent in 1871. Apparently he could not afford the patent fee of $250. Instead he filed a "Caveat". Ie, an announcement that he was working on the device. Such caveats were used to claim rights to an invention before it was perfected. He renewed the Caveat in 1872 and 1873, but let lapse after that. Such a caveat almost certainly did not contain the sort of details that Bell would have needed if he stole the idea. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by TimMann on Nov 15th, 2003, 12:25am on 11/14/03 at 16:48:43, Sir Col wrote:
Ha, proof that Hollywood thinks we are subhuman, as movies run at only 24 frames per second. Hmm, but it looks like motion to me, so they must be right! Oooh ooh ugh eep eep eep! Seriously, movies are shot at 24 fps and projected at that rate in theaters. On British TV, they are shown at 25 fps, either by running them slightly too fast or by duplicating every 24th frame. On American TV, where there are 60 "fields" (each consisting of every other scan line in a frame) per second, I believe 24 frames are usually (?) stretched to 30 by showing every 4th field twice, which is less obvious than showing both fields of every 4th frame twice. Older silent movies with hand-cranked cameras were flimed at approximately 16 fps, though this varies a lot. The illusion of motion is still pretty good even when they are projected at the correct rate, although the flicker is quite noticeable. (You often see them projected at a constant 24 fps, which of course makes the actors look silly -- running around jerkily.) Why all these differences? Movies and TV used to be deadly competitors, and no one would admit for a long time that it would have been in the public interest to standardize on the same frame rate and screen shape. The current 4:3 screen ratio of American TV matches old movies before "widescreen" was introduced to try to draw crowds back to the theaters from their TV sets. The 50 Hz vs. 60 Hz difference in AC power line frequency between England and the US plays in as well. I don' t know how that originated. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by BNC on Nov 15th, 2003, 7:45am on 11/15/03 at 00:25:02, TimMann wrote:
AFAIK, movies have a type of "chopper" that has the effect of "doubling" the frame rate (projecting each frame twice, for half the time, sort of). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 15th, 2003, 9:44am on 11/14/03 at 21:36:05, Icarus wrote:
I would include insects under animals, but I wouldn't say they have a brain, it's just one ganglion if memory serves me right. A brain is more complex. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by TimMann on Nov 15th, 2003, 11:43am The apple question leads into an interesting area. I learned quite a bit just by doing a little web searching. Here are some interesting writings about the necessity of grafting apples to get uniformity: http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail/html-home/25-html/0467.html http://www.pulseplanet.com/archive/Mar00/2099.html Wine grapes are also grafted, both for uniformity -- very important in wine growing -- and because the wine varieties are not resistent to phylloxera. See: http://www.winepros.org/wine101/viniculture.htm http://www.winepros.org/wine101/phylloxera.htm On the other hand, there are also many crops that are grown from seed. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 15th, 2003, 5:32pm Indeed they were interesting, thanks for sharing them, TimMann. So Icarus, you're not too convinced of the 'facts'? ::) Apparently, a 134 year old man from Oregon, who earlier this year proved that 0.999...<1, clearly recalled, as a 2 year old, seeing Alexanda Graham Bell steal Meucci's design from the patent office in which he worked. When asked why he took so long to tell anyone, he explained that his mother sent him out, at aged 10, to pick a single Honey Mushroom from Malheur National Forest; he's only just got back. He generously decided to leave a little over 2000 acres for someone else, after collecting hundreds of thousands of square miles of the mushroom. It's estimated that the mushroom would have covered over half the planet before this. :P (I wonder how many 'facts' in the above paragraph may be found questionable by some people?) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 15th, 2003, 6:18pm Oh... My humble apologies! I didn't know that there was such a credible eyewitness. Doubtless he was the one who came up with lili & a titi as well? (Do you ever plan on letting us know QI's definition of this?) ;) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 16th, 2003, 3:10am towr gave the answer about half way down page 2, but to save you finding it... A liger is produced when a male lion breeds with a female tiger, a tigon is produced when a male tiger breeds with a female lion. I believe that tigons are true hybrids, and are dwarfs compared with ligers: the average male tigon is about 350lbs, whereas the average male liger (the world's largest cat) weighs in at 900lbs and can stand at 12 feet on his hind legs. As the tigon is a true hybrid, the female is also sterile, as is the female liger. However, the male liger is not sterile. If he reproduces with a lion, the offspring will be a lili, and the offspring with a tiger would be a titi. Here are two links for reference. This explains about titis and lilis: http://www.tigers-animal-actors.com/about/liger/liger.html This webpage doesn't mention lilis or titis, but it does talk about tigons and ligers. Check out the size of the liger at the bottom! :o http://www.greenapple.com/~jorp/amzanim/cross02a.htm |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 16th, 2003, 1:17pm Okay - I'd never heard of any of this before. I had assumed towr was being facetious with his lion-liger, tigon-tiger answer. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 16th, 2003, 1:54pm c'mon, don't you know me better than that yet ::) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 23rd, 2003, 12:42am I was a little disappointed in their answer to the largest organism on the planet - according to the (controversial) Gaia theory, the correct answer is the planet itself - or at least the biosphere - the region inhabited by living tissues. The primary claim of Gaia theory is that an entire planet can be usefully regarded as a living organism, capable of homeostasis. When compared with claims like "Pluto is not a planet" Gaia theory stands up pretty well. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 23rd, 2003, 7:11am Perhaps, but our planet doesn't really reproduce (nor does the biosphere).. So like a virus it can't really be considered a living organism.. Though I suppose if our space program advances enough we could bring live to new planets, and that could be considered procreation of the biosphere.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Speaker on Nov 24th, 2003, 5:35pm It seems that you are making the ability to reproduce a defining component of life. Is tha the accepted definition? I considered saying Gaia for my answer, but figured that the planet could not be on the planet. But, if you say biosphere, then you can get around that condition. That's why I said the Rocky Mountains. (I also said it to throw a little twist into the argument.) ;D |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 24th, 2003, 11:49pm on 11/24/03 at 17:35:59, Speaker wrote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Speaker on Nov 25th, 2003, 12:47am What about animals like ants and bees. The majority of individuals cannot reproduce. Does this fall under the infertility caveat? I generally believe that the ability to reproduce is a necessary condition for life, but I want to find an exception. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 25th, 2003, 3:43am I think you have to look at it at a species level.. Ants, as a species, reproduce. Even though most individual ants don't. Besides an individual human can't reproduce either, it takes two. It's hardly unfair for it taking a nest in the case of ants, they're a lot smaller after all ;) And you could also call the nest an organism in its own right, if you want to consider the biosphere one (its a much smaller leap). So can biospheres as a 'species' be said to reproduce? On the one hand they probably can reproduce: - asteroids/comets can on impact throw live from a planet into space, which may then land on another planet where it may spring life - some species of animal may get advanced enough to invent space travel and bring live to new planets. On the other hand I don't think biospheres are in any way driven to reproduce. Most species on earth are driven to behaviour that causes them to reproduce. Otherwise they go extinct. But then a biosphere is virtually immortal, so there is less need to reproduce for survival, like is for normal species. Though admittedly when the sun goes out all life on earth is doomed.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 25th, 2003, 5:25am The other point about reproduction is that very few living things are able to reproduce at any stage during their lifecycle - and even those that are generally can only do it so many times in rapid succession - so judging Gaia as not being alive is like judging babies not to be alive... and even if Gaia never reproduces that doesn't prove that she lacks the capability. As Towr mentioned, there are very plausible mechanisms whereby she could. As to the question of regarding a system as an individual organism, in the strictest sense, most of what we consider to be organisms today are in fact descended, not from single organisms, but from systems of single organisms - even single celled organisms often have internal structures whose ancestors were independent organisms in their own right... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Dec 23rd, 2003, 4:51am In case anyone wants to see it, tonight there's a QI christmas special on BBC 2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by paul on Jul 18th, 2004, 7:00pm Hey everyone. I was wondering, did anyone get the name of that really great bloke who was related to Stephen Fry. Apparently he was the captain of the english rugby, cricket, and football teams, spoke a multitude of languages, did an entire host of different things as well as being offered the job of King of Albania (which he refused, considering what had happened to the previous kings). Can anyone help? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Jul 19th, 2004, 2:01am I can't remember his name, though I recall them talking about him. Of course there's always google: Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Oct 8th, 2004, 3:06am For anyone who's (quite) interested, the second season of QI starts tonight in UK. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 8th, 2004, 12:33pm Thanks! I hadn't spotted that it was back on. 8) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 9th, 2004, 5:55am Here are collection of questions from the show last night... (1) What colour was the sky in Ancient Greece? (2) What does a rainbow look like from behind? (3) Approximately, what fraction of insects are beetles? (4) Of all the species of animal (including insects) and plant, roughly what percentage are thought to be beetles? (5) Why couldn't Henry VIII marry Lord Pembroke? (6) What rhymes with orange? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 9th, 2004, 8:37am (1) What colour was the sky in Ancient Greece? Black, with very bright dots. (2) What does a rainbow look like from behind? From behind what? "Get out the way! you're blocking my view!" (3) Approximately, what fraction of insects are beetles? Either 0 or 100. Either the insect is a beetle or it isn't. It can't be a fraction of a beetle! (4) Of all the species of animal (including insects) and plant, roughly what percentage are thought to be beetles? Does this include cars? (5) Why couldn't Henry VIII marry Lord Pembroke? He didn't live in Massachussets. (6) What rhymes with orange? The stoveless. More seriously: [hide](1) I think my answer above is quite good. (2) There is no such thing as "behind a rainbow". Rainbows are not actual physical objects, but patterns of refracted & reflected light. (3) It depends on whether you mean by count of individuals, count of species, biomass.... By count of individuals, I suspect somewhere in 70-80% range but do not really know. (4) Same thing. By biomass, the answer is small. 1 or 2 % at most. By species count, it is something over 90%, I believe. (5) Henry didn't swing that way. (6) No single word that I am aware of, but many combos (such as the one I hinted at) rhyme just fine.[/hide] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 9th, 2004, 9:35am Good answers, Icarus! ;D I especially like your answer to (1). The "official" answers... ::[hide] (1) Bronze. The Ancient Greeks had no word for blue in their language (as with the modern Welsh language!). We have become so used to describing colours by their spectral qualities that we will find it difficult to imagine a culture that used colours to describe tones. For example, they would have described wine, the sea, and sheep, as red. (2) As you said, Icarus. A rainbow is generated by the sunlight reflecting off raindrops at an angle of 42o. So from "behind the rainbow", you would not see it. You might, because of the direction of the sun, see a rainbow behind you. (3) You're pretty much right again, Icarus; and it was a badly worded question. It is thought that beetles account for 2/3 of all species of insects. (4) A little over this time, Icarus. Beetles are believed to account for 20% of all animal and plant species. (5) Apparently, in an attempt to keep Anne Boleyn happy, Henry VIII gave her the title of marquis of Pembroke (a male title), so she was known as Lord Pembroke. Hence Henry was unable (initially) to marry Lord Pembroke because the pope would not grant a divorce from Catherine of Aragon. (6) Although somewhat questionable, because they are proper nouns, Blorange (a place in Wales) and the surname, Gorringe (as in Henry Honeychurch Gorringe, who brought Cleopatra's needle to Central Park, New York), all rhyme with orange. [/hide]:: |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 9th, 2004, 11:06am The ancient greeks might not have had a word for blue, but their sky was the same colours as ours (sometimes black with white spots, sometimes blue, sometimes other colours and combinations, depending on weather and time of day..) Whether they could name it doesn't change what it is. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Grimbal on Oct 9th, 2004, 11:48am (1) Anyway, I am sure they used a greek word. (6) I'd like to say: another orange. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 9th, 2004, 1:22pm This concept of Ancient Greeks perceiving colours differently to us has captured my imagination, and perhaps it has sent me over the edge. (See below!) I did some research, but to no avail. I did, however, find this: http://www.cooper.edu/classes/art/hta321/99spring/Rebecca.html My theory of life, the universe, and everything, is that over time we have become less intelligent. From a genetic perspective it is through loss of information, from my (biased) Christian perspective it is due to the fall. I suspect that the Ancient Greeks were masterfully intelligent and, as a consequence, perceived the world far more vividly and completely than we do today. We satisfy our failing minds with classifying objects by something as superficial as the ability of the material to absorb (or not absorb) different wavelengths of light. The Ancient Greeks, however, saw the connectivity of life in an entirely different way and in using language, that we pathetically interpret as colour, to describe their world, they were in fact conveying something far richer and deeper than we will ever understand. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 9th, 2004, 1:36pm There has been some research done on culturally dependant perception of colour, it's certainly not just the ancient greeks that saw colours differently than we do. Distinction of colours is learned, as are many other things we think of ask quite natural. The mention of Homer, relating to colour, is also interesting, as he's said to be blind.. Surely then he's an expert on what colour the sky is ::) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Oct 9th, 2004, 1:58pm A friend's suggestion for "what rhymes with orange" - a mobile phone company marketing concept creation executive (or whatever title the people who write the adverts prefer to be known by) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 17th, 2004, 8:48am The BBC have a section on their website dedicated to QI, and it can be found at the link below. It is not very interactive yet, but maybe it will grow over time. http://www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/qi/ Here is a very short RealMedia video clip from one of the shows. You will see the QImaster (Stephen Fry) and one of the regulars, Alan Davies: www.bbc.co.uk/comedy/qi/clips/realmedia/ep1.ram |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 30th, 2004, 3:53pm From the episode last night... (1) Why is Vladimir Putin happy to be considered bald? (2) Approximately what fraction of the earth is water? (3) During which war were the highest proportion of British killed? I don't know if this is true, and maybe someone from America can confirm it, but they claimed on the show that there is a cafe in North America called, "Road Kill Cafe". Apparently they specialise in cooking whatever you run over, with their slogan being, "Straight from your grill to ours." |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 30th, 2004, 6:57pm (1) Why is Vladimir Putin happy to be considered bald? Because Russians consider it a sign of virility. (2) Approximately what fraction of the earth is water? I can't see how it could be much above zero. Certainly less than 1%. (3) During which war were the highest proportion of British killed? Proportion of what? Are we talking about the proportion of the British population that was killed, or are we talking about the proportion of those killed that were British? Of course, I'd have to guess either way. I will guess the war of the Roses. Quote:
I've heard people joke about it a lot. If there is a real one, it is news to me. Even with the nut cases we have, I can't believe that they would get a lot of business! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by THUDandBLUNDER on Oct 30th, 2004, 8:48pm Quote:
Or about the proportion of British combatants killed? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Oct 31st, 2004, 1:39am Sorry I didn't make number (3) very clear... (3) During which war were the highest proportion of casualties (military and civilian) British? Spot on with number (2), Icarus. The obvious, but wrong, answer on the show was 2/3, as most people ignore the question being asked and recall the trivial classic, "What fraction of the earth's surface is covered with water?" They didn't make it very clear on the show what fraction the actual answer is. First of all they said less than 1%, then later they said that there is about forty times more non-aqueous material than water: which would make it around 2.5% water? You'll have to rethink on (1). The answer, albeit suspect, is very interesting. As a clue, think about the last two Solviet Presidents. If you can remember the previous leaders too, it will help you spot the connection. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 31st, 2004, 7:38am on 10/31/04 at 01:39:20, Sir Col wrote:
Supposedly it will be whatever internal British (not necessarily civil) war that had the least mercenaries.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Oct 31st, 2004, 11:33am on 10/31/04 at 01:39:20, Sir Col wrote:
The earth is about 8.6 [times] 1012 km3 in volume, and has a surface area of about 6 [times] 10 9 km2. Assuming that the entire surface of the earth were covered by 4 km of water (the average ocean depth is about 3.7 km), this gives about 2.4 [times] 1010 cubic meters of water. Thus by volume, water is less than 0.28% of the Earth. Since water is generally less dense than rock, by mass it has to be an even smaller percentage. Quote:
Drat! I thought that was good guess! Reviewing the list of Russian/Soviet Leaders (before the fall of communism, the real power was in the Party chairmanship, not the presidency), we have: Lenin (bald) Stalin (not bald) Krushchev (bald) Brezhnev (not bald) Andropov (I don't remember - he was a short-timer) Chernenko (I don't remember - he was also a short-timer) Gorbachev (bald) Yeltsin (not bald) Putin (bald) Assuming that Andropov was bald and Chernenko was not, there is a definite pattern here. This suggests that Putin is "glad to be bald" (likely said in jest) because if he weren't, some other baldy would be president instead of him. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Oct 31st, 2004, 1:28pm on 10/31/04 at 01:39:20, Sir Col wrote:
on 10/31/04 at 11:33:31, Icarus wrote:
Though I suppose their former leaders didn't bring them much luck, so perhaps a change in the pattern would be good.. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 5th, 2004, 4:34pm Ah, I hadn't realised they were referring to the earth's crust; that makes more sense. Thanks, towr! Here are some from tonight's show... (1) Name a dinosaur beginning with the letter B. (2) How long can a chicken survive without its head? (3) Who invented the light bulb? (4) Who discovered penicillin? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 6th, 2004, 3:57am on 11/05/04 at 16:34:17, Sir Col wrote:
apathosaurus ;) Quote:
Quote:
Or maybe (french) cheese makers (the white crust is a variant of the penicilin fungus) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 6th, 2004, 6:03am Depends how you define "discovering penicillin" - if you just mean discovering that certain moulds cure some infections, then the show's answer stands. If you mean isolating the compound penicillin (and identifying it) then it probably was Alexander Fleming or someone even more recent... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by BNC on Nov 6th, 2004, 11:42am on 11/05/04 at 16:34:17, Sir Col wrote:
Barney... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: GET A LIFE Post by Brian Damage on Nov 12th, 2004, 9:58am You are a bunch of sad, strange little people. GET A LIFE YOU MUPPETS!!!!!!!!!! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by elmo on Nov 12th, 2004, 11:40am muppets are sad? Little, yes. Grouchy, ticklish, fuzzy, porcine, swedish, green, and machine-washable, but never sad. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Three Hands on Nov 13th, 2004, 5:35am Ignoring the troll, a few more from this week. What is the most successful (in Darwinian terms) life-form on the planet? How many moons does the Earth have? What was unusual about the birth of Julius Caesar? What eats our bodies when we're dead? Can't remember any of the others off the top of my head - but I'm sure they were more interesting than this selection... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 13th, 2004, 7:46am What is the most successful (in Darwinian terms) life-form on the planet? That depends on what is meant by "in Darwinian terms". If the question means "most descendents", I would assume it would be some single celled creature. How many moons does the Earth have? Depends on how exactly you define "moon". I have tried to locate the IAU's definition, but have been unable. If you count only natural bodies visible to the naked eye here on Earth, then I believe the answer is still the traditional "one". What was unusual about the birth of Julius Caesar? The name "Caesarean Section" came about for a reason. What eats our bodies when we're dead? Lots of critters, if given the chance. But most commonly, various paramecium. Quote:
So you remember the boring ones, but forget the interesting? :D |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Nov 13th, 2004, 8:00am Concerning Sir Col's ealier list: The Apathosaurus is not really the Brontosaurus renamed, as the brontosaurus was actually a mixture of several skeletons. This is why the brontosaurus "species" was entirely discarded, and the true dinosaur was given a different name. So my money is on "Barney", even if we only wish he had gone extinct millions of years ago. Headless chickens have been known to survive for months, walking around, and even displaying some behavioral characteristics of normal chickens, if some perverted soul is willing to feed them and make sure that their gullets and breathing tubes don't grow over. I don't know who first noticed that sufficient electrical current through a small wire will cause it to glow, but I believe Edison was the one who came up with the basic ideas to turn this observed behavior into a practical means of providing light, which to me is what is required to have actually "invented the light bulb". Similar remarks apply to the discovery of penicillin, as has already be discussed. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 13th, 2004, 5:37pm The light bulb is an interesting one. You can read a bit about it here: http://www.coolquiz.com/trivia/explain/docs/edison.asp I was a little unconvinced by the moon question in last night's show. As you said, Icarus, if we count objects seen with the naked eye, there is only one. However, they suggested that there are nine known significant objects that orbit the earth. I've not managed to find any definitive information on this. I did, however, find this: http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/question.php?number=578 Apparently Julius was not born by caesarean section! We know this because in his day the only way they could perform such a procedure was at the cost of the mother's life. As there exist documents evidencing his mother being alive later in his life, it is impossible for him to have been birthed this way. The word 'caesarean' originates from the Latin word, caedaere, which means, to cut. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 14th, 2004, 10:54am According to last series: on 10/03/03 at 03:34:15, Sir Col wrote:
Though as Icarus pointed out last year, Cruithne actually co-orbits the sun with the Earth, so isn't really a moon anyway... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Three Hands on Nov 15th, 2004, 3:05am A slight amendment for Sir Col, in that the total number of "moons" that astronomers had found had risen to 5 - and I admit that my memory was sadly only as good as Alan's for this one, whereby I remembered the last season's answer, but forgot the fact they like to be tricky...::) As you may have guessed, there is nothing known to be interesting about the birth of Julius Caesar. While the Romans did have a method similar to caesarian section, the mother invariably died during the procedure, and Julius' mother is known to have survived for years after his birth. This question was simply there to catch Alan out, again. Another one I've since remembered: For what crimes can you be executed for in Britain currently? |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Nov 15th, 2004, 5:24am "How many moons does the Earth have?" 533, but we only discovered 5 so far ;) It's a rather badly stated question, isn't it? No one can possibly know the real answer. You can answer "how many moons that are visible with the naked eye does the earth have?", or "how many moons of the earth has scientists found so far", but you can never be certain of how many moons there actually are. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by John_Gaughan on Nov 15th, 2004, 6:37am I thought Earth had only two objects that we consider moons -- the Moon, and Cruthne. I am sure there are other hunks of rock floating around out there, but those were the main ones. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by THUDandBLUNDER on Nov 15th, 2004, 8:05am Quote:
:[hide]Given how few secrets we have, how likely is it?[/hide] |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by steve brown on Nov 15th, 2004, 8:09am The main thing I have learnt from this discussion is that there are comedians in Germany. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Nov 15th, 2004, 9:51am Eh? Comedians? Germany? T&B, I'm afraid that was one of the "traps" that they set. Apparently since the abolition of the death penalty in 1965 and its supposed permanence in 1969, high treason, piracy, and arson in the royal dockyards, remained theoretically still punishable by death. However, in 1999 we signed an agreement to the European Convention of Human Rights that meant that capital punishment was finally abolished. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Three Hands on Nov 15th, 2004, 10:06am on 11/15/04 at 05:24:07, towr wrote:
Well, presumably God knows, but that's assume He exists... In any case, the question wording does seem to be rather suspect for quite a few in QI, to make them sound more impressive, or relaxed, or something like that. At least Stephen Fry stated that the answer of "1" would have been relatively acceptable, since there is only one moon orbitting Earth visible to the naked eye, since the other 3 that have been discovered recently are all, surprisingly enough, not visible to the naked eye. Hence, he would have accepted "1" or "5", but certainly not "2" (Poor Alan...) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Grimbal on Nov 15th, 2004, 1:43pm on 11/15/04 at 08:05:49, THUDandBLUNDER wrote:
Being a turkey around thanksgiving. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 16th, 2004, 8:35am Firstly, I believe that Thanksgiving is largely restricted to the US. Secondly, while it may lead to death, being a turkey is not a crime... |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by THUDandBLUNDER on Nov 16th, 2004, 9:45am on 11/16/04 at 08:35:45, rmsgrey wrote:
James Fingas might disagree. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by John_Gaughan on Nov 16th, 2004, 11:13am on 11/16/04 at 09:45:23, THUDandBLUNDER wrote:
I think that is why he said "largely restricted" -- our cold cousins to the north also celebrate Thanksgiving. However, I am not aware of any other countries that celebrate that holiday, no matter which day it falls on. I know some cultures celebrate similar holidays, but not with the same roots as us in North America. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by EZ_Lonny on Nov 18th, 2004, 6:54am My collegue is from Turkey, but I am not planning to eat him at Thanksving or any other day. BTW In Holland we only serve turkey as a feastmeal at Christmas |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Speaker on Nov 18th, 2004, 5:51pm In Japan, November 23 is "Labour Thanksgiving Day" in which we take a day off in honor of not taking a day off. But, no one eats Turkey here much at all. Last year, we had sushi for our harvest celebration. Just not the same.... :-[ |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Noke Lieu on Nov 18th, 2004, 7:15pm on 11/16/04 at 09:45:23, THUDandBLUNDER wrote:
What? James Fingas knows rmsgrey's beliefs better than rmsgrey does? Wow. no wonder he was so good.... :P |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by SWF on Nov 18th, 2004, 7:39pm I think TB was referring to Canadian Thanksgiving; James Fingas is from Canada. All I know about Canadian Thanksgiving is that it sometimes shows up on calendars. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Grimbal on Nov 19th, 2004, 4:13am I was the one mentionned Thanksgiving. I just remembered a Mr. Bean cooking a turkey. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by rmsgrey on Nov 19th, 2004, 5:58am Here, in UK, the Christmas Turkey replaced the Christmas Goose sometime in the last hundred years or so (If memory serves, Ebenezer Scrooge ordered a goose for Cratchitt's family - if not, then the changeover probably sits between 1 and 2 centuries back...) I don't know enough about Canadian holidays to have had their Thanksgiving in mind - I was thinking more along the lines of Americans living abroad. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by THUDandBLUNDER on Nov 19th, 2004, 6:49am Sometimes Americans ask me if we have Thanksgiving in England (which is like me asking them if they have Guy Fawkes Night in America). ::) I always reply that we do, and that it is on September 6th, the date that the Mayflower finally left our shores. :P |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Dec 3rd, 2004, 4:15pm Here are a dozen more questions to show off your general ignorance... (1) What did Buffalo Bill do to buffalo? (2) What was the biggest tourist attraction in Canada between 1934 and 1943? (3) Name all of the events in the first recorded olympics in 776 B.C.E. (4) Why is the marathon 26 miles 385 yards long? (5) Where were the first olympics held? (6) What was special about 8 year old girls in Sweden in 1994? (7) What do St. Bernard dogs carry in the barrel around their necks? (8) What does Ben-Hur and Billy The Kid have in common? (9) What is the best floor (storey) to throw a cat from? (10) What is the commonest material in the world? (11) What did Roman Emperors do to signal the death of a gladiator? (12) Name the organisation that American fought in the Vietnam war. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Dec 3rd, 2004, 8:31pm (1) What did Buffalo Bill do to buffalo? Put them on display in his show. (Unless they are nitpicking about bison not being buffalo. In that case, the answer is probably "nothing much".) (2) What was the biggest tourist attraction in Canada between 1934 and 1943? Niagara Falls is probably the overall top attractor of tourists. Did something else surpass it in these years? (3) Name all of the events in the first recorded olympics in 776 B.C.E. Okay! I'll call them "Fred", "George", "Lisa", ... (4) Why is the marathon 26 miles 385 yards long? Because that is how far the runner travelled who ran from the battle of Marathon to Athens to inform them of the victory, and of the threat from the remaining troops in the Persian army who were attempting to assault Athens from the sea. The runner collapsed and died after delivering the message. (5) Where were the first olympics held? Olympia, Greece. (6) What was special about 8 year old girls in Sweden in 1994? 8-year-old girls are special everywhere, every year. (7) What do St. Bernard dogs carry in the barrel around their necks? Brandy is a common idea. If this is not the case, then I don't know. (Do they still use these dogs?) (8) What does Ben-Hur and Billy The Kid have in common? Gender and initial. (9) What is the best floor (storey) to throw a cat from? I find that the tenth to twentieth floors work best. Lower, and they are able to absorb the shock in their feet. Higher, and they splat, which can be hard to clean up. ::) (10) What is the commonest material in the world? Iron (11) What did Roman Emperors do to signal the death of a gladiator? held out their hand palm down. (12) Name the organisation that American fought in the Vietnam war. There was more than one. We fought the Viet Cong in Vietnam, and the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Dec 4th, 2004, 5:21am On the programme when a contestant suggests the obvious but wrong answer a klaxxon is sounded and they lose ten points. Right now, I'd be reaching for my ears, and I'm afraid that you would have been awarded at least -60 points. ;D (1) What did Buffalo Bill do to buffalo? You were spot on about the nitpicking. ;) (2) What was the biggest tourist attraction in Canada between 1934 and 1943? *klaxxon* Elzire and Oliva Dionne gave birth to quintuplets. Due to the extreme rarity of this at the time they were taken away from their family by the Ontario government and placed on display to the public. In 1998 the Candadian government paid out $4 million compensation to the remaining two girls for the emotional damage caused during their formative years. You can read some of the facts here: http://schwinger.harvard.edu/%7Eterning/bios/Dionne.html 3) Name all of the events in the first recorded olympics in 776 B.C.E. *chuckle* Try again! :P (4) Why is the marathon 26 miles 385 yards long? *klaxxon* It turns out that the common story has been distorted. Pheidippides was sent from the battle at Marathon to Sparta, a distance of 145 miles! Unfortunately when he arrived he was sent away because they were celebrating a holy festival. The real reason for the peculiar distance comes from the Olypmics held in London in 1908. A long distance race started outside a window at Windsor Castle and finished at White City Stadium, a distance of 26 miles 385 yards. Thus was born the "traditional" distance. (5) Where were the first olympics held? *klaxxon* The first internationally recognised Olympics took place in 1896 in Athens, Greece. However, fifty years ealier, Dr. W. P. Brooks organised the first Modern Olympics in Wenlock, Shropshire, England. Baron Pierre de Coubertin spoke with a 91 year old Dr. Books in 1890 about giving it a greater international appeal and thus was born the first international Modern Olympics. (6) What was special about 8 year old girls in Sweden in 1994? Nice answer, but, no. (7) What do St. Bernard dogs carry in the barrel around their necks? *klaxxon* Brandy would kill anyone suffering from hypothemia! Although some dogs did carry milk, most did not wear barrels at all. The reason for the popular image we have is due to a portrait of an heroic St. Bernard, called Barry, around 1831. Barry saved the lives of 40 people. Unfortunately the 41st person he tried to save killed him, as he had mistaken him for a wolf. (8 ) What does Ben-Hur and Billy The Kid have in common? True, but try again. (9) What is the best floor (storey) to throw a cat from? This really surprised me... Apparently a veterinary centre in New York completed a survey of 132 cases of cats falling from buildings. They noted that as the height increased towards the 5th floor, the extent of injury also increased. However, from the 7th floor and above the injuries decreased significantly. It seems that cats reach a terminal velocity during this distance of 60 m.p.h. and are able to use their bodies to glide. Cats have been known to survive falling from aeroplanes! (Younger visitors do not try these experiments at home!) (10) What is the commonest material in the world? *klaxxon* Although I suspect there will be some objection to this: what constitutes material? Is it referring to compound, element, or sub-atomic level of matter? The answer they gave was the mineral Perovskite, but my research cannot support this. They claimed that 50% of the earth's core is made of this substance?! I believed that quartz was the most common mineral, or is this only in the Earth's crust? (11) What did Roman Emperors do to signal the death of a gladiator? Apparently they held their thumbs up?! (12) Name the organisation that American fought in the Vietnam war. *klaxxon* The name "Viet Cong" was made up by the CIA, as they felt it sounded more menacing than the real name; it also conjured up connections with the word "communism", to reinforce the worries about the group. It turns out that the real name for the group was Viet Minh, after Ho Chi Minh. Also, rather interestingly, they claimed that the USA supplied arms to Vietnam in the 1950's to help with their war against France. In 1954, the French did a surprising thing, they surrended! Only ten years later, the USA found themselves fighting a country that was armed to the teeth with weapons that they had supplied. Is there any truth in this? I was under the impression that America supplied arms to the French. Still to guess: (3), (6), and (8 ). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Dec 4th, 2004, 10:17am on 12/04/04 at 05:21:51, Sir Col wrote:
It amazes me that these people so badly strain gnats and swallow camels. Buffalo is a common accepted name for bison, even if they are not related to other buffalo. Quote:
I find this version even more doubtful. And evidence has already shown that this show is rather careless in its research. In particular: Quote:
***KLAXXON*** Quote:
You didn't ask where the first MODERN olympics were held! You asked where the first olympics were held, and in question 3, you admit they were held in 776 BC, not the mid 1800s. Where were they held? Olympia, Greece. Quote:
So swedish 8-year-old girls were not special, unlike all others? I guess that counts as special... Quote:
I never believed the brandy story (which need not be deadly), nor the requirement for barrels. But since the question assumed the barrels, I gave the only thing I knew. Quote:
There are doubtless many things they had in common. I do not know either well enough to try to guess which one it is this question is after. Quote:
I don't buy this. I could understand injuries leveling off because of the terminal velocity, but why would they decrease? Quote:
I definitely do not buy this! Our best estimates of core composition are ~86% Iron, 4% Nickel, and 10% lighter materials. I doubt very seriously the mineral Perovskite could even exist in the core, as the tremendous heat and pressure would break the molecular bonds. I am sticking to my iron answer! Quote:
This isn't what I've heard, and rather doubt it, but do not have time now to go look it up. Quote:
Sounds like their researchers found some conspiracy site and swallowed everything on it hook, line, and sinker. "Viet Cong" conjures of connections with "communism"?? While "Viet Minh" doesn't, even though Minh was a known communist leader?? Besides which, they did not specify a particular origin for the name. Even if they are correct as to how the name "Viet Cong" came about, it is still a name for the organization the US fought in the Vietnam war. The show should be *klaxxoned* on this one. Quote:
America supported France in this conflict. The opposing side was communist, and stopping the spread of communism was the main thrust of US foreign policy after WWII. The idea that we armed communists against a democratic ally is ridiculous. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Sir Col on Dec 4th, 2004, 11:02am Sorry if I don't get all the facts spot on, like the exact wording of questions, but I do it all from memory. The reasoning behind the 7th floor theory for the falling cat is that it does not have time to position its body for optimum descent for lower heights. Hence the extent of injuries increase, until it gets to this critical height. The theory suggests that ANY height above this has equal impact damage. In other words, it is just as likely to suffer the same damage from the top of the Empire State building as it would from a 7th floor apartment window. I found this link about the Modern Olypmpics: http://members.shaw.ca/constadina/articles/olympicsthenandnow.htm The question about the events at the first recorded Olympics is separate from this. They claimed that there was only one event at the first ever Olympics: 192 metre race. The Swedish girls questions was fascinating. Apparently on 1 Jan 1994 there were 112521 eight year old girls in Sweden. On 1 Jan 1995 there were 112521 nine year old girls. Although it is possible that some may have emigrated and some may have arrived from other countries, it seems to suggest that there were no deaths for that particular group during a period of one year. You can often rely on Wikipedia for good information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viet_Minh The Ben-Hur link is a little tenuous and is down to Lew Wallace, the author of the novel, Ben-Hur. He was governor of New Mexico and during his term there he wrote the novel and signed the death warrant for Billy the Kid. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Icarus on Dec 4th, 2004, 12:34pm The modern olympics are immaterial to this. You can't count me wrong for correctly answering the question, just because you asked the wrong question! Wikipedia's article concerning the Viet Minh and Viet Cong makes much more sense than what was stated before: The Viet Minh was the opposition force against France formed in 1941. When the Japanese invaded, ousting the French, the Viet Minh started opposing them. In WWII, the US did indeed supply the Viet Minh in this struggle. After the war, France resumed its occupation, and the US supported France. When the French surrendered in 1954, and the country was divided, our support went to the South Vietnamese, because they were not communist. The name "Viet Cong" is a contraction of the Vietnamese phrase for "Vietnamese communist", and was coined by the South Vietnamese president to describe his opposition. The guerilla army fought first by the S.V. and then by the USA was the "PALF" or People's Armed Liberation Forces. This was a separate group from the Viet Minh. As for the cats, it may be true that their survival improves past 7th floor heights, but I am highly sceptical of this explanation. Cats are extremely fast about "getting into position". One thing I actually have done with cats is experiment to find out how much height they need to get their feet under them when falling (I dropped my cat onto a soft surface, so it was annoyed but uninjured). What I found is they can do this trick in about 18 inches (50 cm). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by towr on Dec 5th, 2004, 7:59am on 12/04/04 at 05:21:51, Sir Col wrote:
He was send from Athens to Sparta, to ask the Spartans to join the fight at marathon. Then he ran back to Athens to tell the Athenians the Spartans would be a few days late. Then supposedly he ran to marathon to tell the army there the same, then he fought in the battle, and after they won ran back to Athens, and dropped dead. Of course he wasn't mentioned by name untill long after all that supposedly happened. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Title: Re: QI (now that's Quite Interesting) Post by Three Hands on Dec 6th, 2004, 7:00am For (11), as far as I know, the only evidence historians have is a passage (probably on of Pliny's letters, but I'm not certain) that states that the appropriate official signalled with his thumb to indicate life or death - not which way round each were. Hollywood, however, wanting to have the dramatic effect, decided to use thumb down as the signal for death, but it is just as likely that thumb up is the correct signal for death. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Powered by YaBB 1 Gold - SP 1.4! Forum software copyright © 2000-2004 Yet another Bulletin Board |