Thanks, all. I kind of figured that some of these “facts” were half-truths or somehow logically convoluted.
Even the conflicting reports make for interesting reading, whether they settle the issues or not.
Peace,
TN*hippie
Thanks, all. I kind of figured that some of these “facts” were half-truths or somehow logically convoluted.
Even the conflicting reports make for interesting reading, whether they settle the issues or not.
Peace,
TN*hippie
This is true for zebras. I don’t know about tigers, but it wouldn’t surprise me.
With respect to the $2 Canadian note: in that particular series of notes, the flag that is flying over Parliament is supposed to be the flag that is contemporary with the person depicted on the front of the note. Since the $2 note showed HM, the flag should be the maple leaf flag, which came into use on February 15, 1965, by a royal proclamation that she signed. The link that Matt gave seems to show a maple leaf, but it’s awfully small. I have some old $2 notes tucked away - I’ll check them and let you know.
On the other hand, the $5 and $10 notes pose a problem. The $5 shows PM Laurier (in office 1896-1911), and the $10 shows PM Macdonald (1867-1874; 1878-1891). The flag on those notes is the Red Ensign, which can look like a US flag, as Tengu notes. The problem is that the Red Ensign didn’t fly over Parliament while Macdonald and Laurier were PMs - the Union Jack did.
Canada requested permission to fly the Red Ensign by an Order-in-Council passed in 1890; the British Admiralty granted the permission in 1892. However, the Red Ensign was intended only to be used at sea, by Canadian vessels. On land, and over Parliament, the Union Jack continued to be flown.
It wasn’t until 1945 that the Red Ensign replaced the Union Jack over Parliament, by authority of Order-in-Council P.C. 5888, dated September 5, 1945. (Source: Matheson, *Canada’s Flag: A Search for a Country,*pp. 25, 40.)
So, the old $5 and $10 notes were historically inaccurate. Whether that came from ignorance, or a misguided nationalism, I don’t know.
With regards to #11, check out this link: http://www.randi.org/jr/05-11-2001.html .
To summarize, James Randi runs a weekly puzzle, and last week’s was to name three English language words with no exact rhymes. Readers sent in several dozen possibilities, Randi found rhymes for some, and challenged readers to find as many rhymes as possible for the rest. Great fun.
samclem: So now I suppose you’re going to tell me that McDonald’s french fries don’t have beef in them? 
My reading of the statement “Peanuts are one of the ingredients in dynamite” was that peanuts are one of the things which are used to make dynamite (maybe not ALL dynamite, but some), which clearly can be true; even if the peanuts (or their oil, if you insist) are the source of the glycerol, rather than the peanuts themselves being crushed and molded into stick form. I wasn’t trying to perpetuate the belief that dynamite sticks would taste good in a Snickers bar. 'Swhy I posted the link, so’s the good millions could see for themselves. YMMV.
Eh, Chas, settle down. I wasn’t contradicting Doc Edgerton.
Both he and the website can be right.
The “fact” as written is deliberately ambiguous, and can be interpreted two ways: does it mean, “Microwaves were discovered after a researcher walked by a radar tube and a chocolate bar melted in his pocket,” or does it mean, "The microwave oven was invented after a researcher walked by a radar tube and a chocolate bar melted in his pocket. "
See? 
Ditto for the “peanuts/dynamite” thing. It’s intended to be entertaining, sort of a “stump the panel” trivia factoid, that only needs to be true enough so you can say, “See, there really are peanuts in dynamite.”
I thought Dijon’s link made perfect sense.
And now it’s time for Shakespeare. From Hamlet.
So, you could say “there’s a king in that beggar’s guts”, the same way you can say “there are peanuts in dynamite”.
Well, I don’t know about tigers, but striped housecats have striped skin. I had an orange tabby who needed emergency surgery one day. A few days later when we picked her up from the vet, they had shaved most of the right side of her body and the stripe pattern from her fur was there in “orangey-pink” and “yellowy-pink” where you would expect to just see pink kitty skin.
So, logically, I’d expect tigers to be the same way. But I’m not gonna shave one to find out.
umm…
Word. Singular. ‘door hinge’ should be two words.
Dijon said
Since I am a “stick-up-the-butt-too-serious-type-person” I would say that a better comparison would be–
If McDonald’s cooked their fries in peanut oil, then they damn well would have to label them as such, as some of their patrons might die.
If they fried their taters in glycerol which was made from peanut oil, then their patrons would have nothing to come back on them about.
DDG Thanks for backing me up that Dijon’s link was more entertainment than informational.
15. Winston Churchill was born in a ladies’ room during a dance. Tricky…there are at least two accounts of his two months premature (therefore a little unexpected) birth.
This is paraphrased…
One
The account his father (perhaps important to remember Randolph was still in command of his faculties at this point) described in a letter (reproduced in Randolph S. Churchill’s biography, Winston S. Churchill, Youth, 1874-1900):
“She [Jennie - Mother] had a fall on Tuesday-walking with the shooters, & a rather imprudent & rough drive in a pony carriage brought on the pains on Saturday night…
We tried to stop them, but it was no use. They went on all Sunday. Of course the Oxford physician did not come, We telegraphed for the London man, Dr Hope, but he did not arrive till this morning. The country Dr is however a clever man, & the baby was safely born at 1:30 this morning after about 8 hrs labour.”
Two
Another account, her sister’s, says that Jennie was dancing gaily at a St. Andrew’s ball in the great ballroom and was whisked off suddenly to the nearest room, piled with cloaks and hats of guests, to have Winston prematurely.
Churchill himself did not corroborate either version. When asked about them, he replied: “Although present on that occasion, I have no clear recollection of the events leading up to it.”
Conclusion: Not clear.
Again, many thanks, y’all.
(note to aim’n’rock: you may also want to check out Your Philosophy in MPSIMS)
Peace,
TN*hippie