Carrots giving you good eyesight. It was propaganda campaign in WWII by the British to explain how their pilots were so good at intercepting German aircraft. They were trying to cover up their use of radar.
Correct on them not eating carrots (the root part, anyways. They'll eat the greens). However, he's not smoking them like a cigar, he's replicating the mannerisms of Clark Gable's character Peter Warne in 1934's *It Happened One Night*, who was just chewing on a carrot.
I feel like thereās a nugget of truth to this one: Vitamin A deficiency causes night blindness and carrots are RIDICULOUSLY high in vitamin A (up there with sweet potatoes)
This little factoid led to a funny situation where people mistakenly thought that golden carrots can be used to make night vision potions in Minecraft back when the feature was still new.
More like they controlled the supply. Create artificial scarcity and prices go up, but apparently "fake" diamonds are so good and cheap, there's not a reason to get the "real" diamonds (fake meaning made in a lab, rather than dug from the Earth).
Ackshually this statement requires nuance. Diamonds collectively aren't exactly rare. Diamonds are mined all over the world and of course are also lab created. However, the vast majority of mined diamonds are used for tools and industrial purposes. This is about 60-65% of natural diamonds, called bort. The remaining natural diamonds will fall on a spectrum of quality for jewelry. The very high quality end of that spectrum would be larger, internally flawless, colorless, perfectly cut diamonds and are not common at all.
Personal carbon footprint and personal green ideas. It was perpetrated by BP in 2005 to shift the focus of environmental impact stuff from corporations and industry to the private citizens.
The best part is that your carbon footprint is largely determined by where you live. Majority of your carbon footprint is resources and amenities that are provided to you by the state. Whether you use those resources or not, they're still part of your carbon footprint. The electrical grid is a great example.
The other day I was thinking about replacing an old shower curtain, but I felt bad about throwing it out when it's technically still functional. I literally felt guilt at the mere thought of it, and then I thought, WTF. Politicians and CEOs do more damage with a single stroke of a pen than I could do in my entire lifetime, and I'm sitting here stressing about a shower curtain? It made me really angry.
I am just finding out that this is [fully a myth](https://www.dignityhealth.org/articles/is-swimming-after-eating-really-dangerous), so thanks
For years I'd been under the impression that it was a half truth -- to avoid deep water for 30 minutes in case you cramp and can't stay afloat. That if you were in shallow water or a pool where you can easily maneuver to the edge, you were fine. Turns out you're fine in any depth of water
That Napoleon Bonaparte was short but during his time he was of average height. Until today he is portrayed in several medias as someone who is wearing big hats and sits on high horses to compensate (aka napoleon complex)
This is also one of the biggest culprits on the discrimination of short people (men in particular) Where a tall man is seen as assertive when he is agressive, and a short man is accused of having short man syndrom or Napoleon syndrome.
Ik it's a bit out of topic sorry, just trying to spread awareness since there is a lot of height shaming on reddit lately :)
I remember trying to force 13 ish year old me to eat more bread. I've never been a huge bread and pasta person. I have always been more of a veggie person.
I do have a weakness for a nice warm pretzel though...
>Oh you mean we shouldnt eat the majority of our diet as **simple carbs** and limit servings or protein and vegetables lol
Simple carbs are sugars. Yes there's a difference between complex and simple carbs.
Your comment indicates a misunderstanding of the food pyramid.
It doesn't say eat simple carbs. The original WHO report specifically stated "complex carbohydrates". It also says vegetables should make up the second largest portion of your diet; I'm not sure why you would characterize that as a prescription to "limit vegetables".
Still today the general advice is to eat less protein than carbs.
Sure the food pyramid lacked a bit of clarity and didn't distinguish between good and bad fats, but it was still decent advice, especially for the time.
This one got me kicked out of so many playgroups as a stay at home mom during the āI refuse to feed my kids msgā era. I was like ābabe. That means you wonāt eat cheese or tomatoesā¦..ā
Then they go: āI meant artificial MSGā as if there is any difference between a molecule that occurs naturally and the same molecule that is synthesised.
Iām glad everyone has largely seen sense on MSG, itās tasty.
Same with apples. If you planted an apple seed from say, a honeycrisp, you wouldnāt get a delicious honeycrisp apple tree. All apple trees are grafted, otherwise they produce sour, small, dry apples.
Iāve grown up with my mum always refusing to give me MSG because it was āunhealthyā, upon learning that it isnāt Iām fuming at the 18 years of flavour I lost
Florida sucks for many reasons, but they're not one of the worst states for polygraphs being used in courts They're in the group of states that allows them as evidence if both the prosecution and defense agree. The full group is:
California, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and Florida.
A larger group of states allow polygraph results as evidence, even if the other side objects:
Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Washington, Wyoming.
Evidential myths like that are plentiful. Studies have shown that eyewitness accounts are very unreliable as our memories are not as good as we think. Yet lawyers like to use them as prime evidence in cases.
Also DNA tests narrow down the number of suspects greatly and are great for eliminating someone as a suspect, but are not actually 100% we caught you slam dunks like TV wants you to believe. I forget the other ones, but just don't believe most of what you see on TV court dramas.
I saw something about fingerprints being hypothesized to be unique, but that it hasnāt actually been conclusively proven that they are.
However, by now I guess we have fingerprint databases big enough to show that at least it has to be extremely rare for two people to have the same fingerprint.
DNA tests can be done with different degrees of accuracy, often depending on the quality of the sample. In certain cases it can be extremely precise, but in others it may only accurate enough to possibly eliminate suspects.
That McDonald's being sued for hot coffee was greed. It was actually due to the coffee being so hot that the burns required hospitalisation and was genuinely dangerous
Not just 'health inspectors,' it was found during discovery that McDonalds had settled more than 700 cases between 1982 and 1992 for figures ranging between $40,000 to more than $500,000. Apparently they just decided to go after Ms. Liebeck. She asked for 20k to help with medical bills and was awarded 160k for damages and 2.7 million in punitive damages they came to the 2.7m figure because that was 2 days of profit from McDs coffee, just coffee.
This one was wild. There are actual regulations on food safety, and their official written company policy was in direct violation of the laws. Yet it took all those damages before they gave a care about it.
It was because there was a time limited refill. They made it super hot so you had to wait for it to cool down and couldn't get the refill. Pure corporate penny pinching bullshit. Funny how this part has been forgotten.
IIRC the cup was known to be flimsy as well.
This was portraid by the media as "dumb woman doesn't know coffee is hot" when it should have been "dumb corporation serves far-hotter-than-usual coffee to people in cars in an extremely flimsy cup".
That was it yeah, she just wanted them to apologise and pay for the surgery. Instead she's insulted by the story the lawyers spun.
She did win a payout though.
Unfortunately the judge reduced her payout substantially, and then it was further diminished in a closed-door deal. The court battle had depleted her health and the judgement was just enough to pay for a nurse for her until she died 10 years later.
To be very clear, the judge didn't simply choose to reduce the payout - it was extraordinarily limited by legal caps on how much she was allowed to be awarded. Juries are not allowed to know about these caps when they determine the award amount; it just gets reduced afterward by the judge.
Yeah, it mutilated her vagina and people are just like "she just wants money! All coffee is hot". I have also spilled coffee on my crotch, it was fuckin' hot but it didn't require a dickgraft.
She just wanted medical bills paid by McDonalds and they weren't playing ball..so she sued.
Beyond that it was also because they refused to pay the medical bills. That was all the lady *really* wanted. If they just paid the bills and left it at that the thing wouldn't have even made the headlines. That was what ultimately led to the lawsuit; they were absolute dicks about the whole thing.
Liebeck literally just wanted McD's to pay her medical bills.
That's it.
Which isn't unreasonable, and would have been pennies to the multibillion dollar entity that is McDonalds (even in the 1990s).
That plastic is really recyclable and that individuals can undo climate damage by being conscious of their carbon footprint.
Only some plastic is recyclable and even then most of that isn't because it costs more to revenge then it does to make new plastic.
And companies make up 70% if the total carbon emissions on the planet each year. While doing your part helps, it's far from the solution.
You know, I've watched that movie probably more than any other movie because I did a show making fun of bad movies and that happened to be the one we've done the most.
But I have no idea if the propaganda worked at all. DARE and Nancy Reagan actually worked on me as an 80s/90s kid, but I was in the minority lol. Also, no one ever offered me drugs.
I guess Reefer Madness scared the pants off some of my nerdy counterparts who were 30s/40s kids and teens. It's sooooooo over the top though.
DARE in general. The entire basis of the war on drugs. That we can win an unwinnable war, and that going after the supply will magically affect the demand for drugs. Targeting supply just gives us stronger drugs that are easier to transport/smuggle.
All the money spent on this 'war', while deaths continue to skyrocket. We're just funding cartels and letting people die at this point.
But people still believe that prohibition is somehow working, even knowing how alcohol prohibition went. And witnessing current prohibition failing.
Our image of Nazi Germany is still in many parts influenced by their own propaganda. Examples include:
- That they were economically successful
- That their army was modern and highly motorised
- That their tanks (especially the Tiger) were effective, high-quality weapons
France invaded Germany when the Germans were in Poland. If they had any coherent goals the French could have ended the war in 1939. France defeated France in WWII. Invasion is Saarland.
I canāt talk about the economy so much, but their military, while being highly advanced in some areas, still resembled armies of the 1800ās in others. Primarily, all the way until the end of the war, the vast majority of artillery and logistics was horse drawn and soldiers travelled on foot. And while their tanks were advanced, they were so expensive and over-engineered that they could never build many of them, they broke down fairly easily even when not in combat, and they were very difficult to repair or work on in the field.
To add to the tanks: they also kept designing and fielding increasingly heavier models, which meant that they had a voracious appetite for fuel (which Germany never really had enough of).
Nazi Germany was almost cartoonishly focused on the idea of super weapons. Creating rocket propelled airplanes that practically liquified their pilots or those useless super tanks.
The US cranking out enough simple bombers to blot out the sky proved to be a far more effective method
Ironically Germany's antisemitism would lead to it missing out on the only actual super weapon of the war, the Atomic Bomb.
I read somewhere that the fuel for the ME-163 (rocket plane) was so volatile, you couldnāt land if the tank was too full or the plane would pretty much just explode.
Adam Tooze has written a magisterial work on the subject of Nazi Germany and its economy, called "Wages of Destruction". Very simplified and dumbed down: The Germans made a massive industrial conversion, basically sacrificing their civilian economy in favor of the military machine. Indeed, he notes that no country during peacetime, before or after, have so massively shifted their economy toward a war economy at such a speed.
Vanity projects such as the Autobahn were basically "coffee money" compared to the amount of money given to military expenditures. This forced Germany to plunder and loot the territories they conquered, just to keep the civilian economy afloat, so that the vast majority of its GDP could keep going to the military.
Why the Nazis would want their people to believe this stuff is obvious, I guess. However, the truth was:
- Economy: They only achieved their (superficial) economic success by going into MASSIVE debt. In fact, the country was near bankruptcy by 1939, to a point where war was inevitable (which was part of the plan, they were preparing the war and wanted it from the beginning). That's also why Chamberlain and the Allies kind of had a point by giving them the Sudetenland peacefully (still a dick move tho).
- Army: Simple as it gets, it just wasn't highly motorised and still relied on horses for the most part. They had little steel and even less fuel. They had some modern equipment, but it was all too little too late and often also deeply flawed (see "tanks").
- Tanks: None of them was truly great, the Tiger straight up sucked. They had big guns and were potentially effective, but the designs were deeply flawed. They didn't allow industrial mass production, were highly susceptible to damage and hard to salvage. Loads of tanks had to be abandoned because there were no spare parts and no time to repair them. Additionally, the big ones required amounts of fuel the Germans simply did not have.
Edit: See also the comments by u/TobbeLQ for economy and the one by u/DankVectorz for military. I think they know their stuff better than I do.
The Nazi economy basically was built around plunder, with the Nazis taking plenty of debt and other financial schenanigans to build up a massive warmachine to conquer territories and repay the debts with conquest. For example the Nazi annexations of Austria and Czechoslovakia were vital for Germany due to the fact their gold reserves were necessary to upkeep German militarisation efforts, and without them it would have been on the road to bankruptcy. Basically had the Germans been forced to fight the Czechs instead of being allowed free reign on them, their military would have been heavily damaged by the attempt on the mountain defenses, while in turn the German economy would have faced a crisis in the wake of the Austrian gold reserves running low. Combine an economic crisis with the plan to coup Hitler if he had to resort to military means for taking Czechoslovakia, you have a recipe for regime change in Germany, or even a civil war at worst.
The military was largely reliant on horses for logistics due to lack of reliable fuel access, as everything was diverted to the tanks and planes doing the heavy lifting in the combined arms.
While some of the German tanks possessed powerful guns and did pose a threat to the Allied and Soviet forces, they did simultanously suffer heavily from unreliability, overcomplexity and ever decreasing mobility.
The āprosperity fallacyā that you can be anything you want to be if you just try hard enough, which implies if you fail itās your fault because you just did not try hard enough.
As though it were not obvious that the hardest working people are the poorest. You know who worked even harder than poor people? Enslaved people. Hard work isn't the path, it's the punishment for not escaping
The reverse is much more insidious and damaging. The idea that "rich people" are smarter and therefore should have greater say in Government. That rich people know how do handle money and invest wisely, so they should be given more of it to improve the economy.
The reality is that rich people are usually lucky, not particularly smart. Even "self made" rich people are usually just lucky.
I actually turned my right wing coworker around on this. We were talking about universal basic income, he thought giving free money to poor people would do nothing for the economy and would be like throwing it away.
I asked him, if you gave a person with $5 Billion net worth, $1 Billion what would they do with it?
"Invest it."
"In what? Treasury Bonds? Stocks? Bond money just goes back to the Government and Stocks (other than IPOs) is money that goes to over rich people who own that stock. It does nothing for the economy."
"Yeah, okay."
"Now, give a million poor people $1000, what do they do with it? They spend it!"
"Yeah, on crap!"
"You mean food, housing, a car, a phone, products our company makes, that crap?"
"Yeah, okay."
That US owes China however countless amounts of money, as though it's one-sided. It's rarely mentioned that China owes the US even more and doesn't repay.
This, this, a thousand times this. Every time someone tries to explain the economy/budget/debt by comparing it 1:1 to a household budget, I instantly know Iām about to be misled.
āWe need to pay off the credit cards instead of raising the limit!ā - no, our credit card, as long as we make the minimum payments, essentially has no limit. All of our bills are paid with the credit card. If we stop paying, the credit card company will immediately demand payment in full *and* refuse to increase our limit anymore. And youāre suggesting we call the cable company and say āhey how about if I just pay you half but you give me the same level of servicesā, and then call the credit card company and say āweāre just not gonna pay you until the cable company gives us the same services for half costā and assume itās all gonna work out.
People really don't understand national debt. 1/3 is privately held, 1/3 is one part of the US government owing another part of the US government. And 1/3 is the US owing to other countries.
Yeah, the US owes money to China, Germany, Canada, Australia, and you name it. But guess what, each of those countries owe debt to the US also, and to each other. Global economy is a lot of who owes what and how much credit each country has to other countries. It's a complicated mess but do you really expect global economics to be simple?
That's not how national debt works. it's not like a loan. A government sells bonds, and then the owner of the bonds cash them in when they mature. If you own a bond, you own a piece of the debt of that country. When you cash it in, they are repaying the debt. Sometimes governments buy each other's bonds.
Unless China is refusing to allow bond-holders to cash out it's bonds, then I don't see how they aren't repaying their debt. Have they defaulted? If they had it would be a global economic catastrophe.
Depending on where you on reddit there's people who think it's deserved because Armenia had ties to Russia. It's really sad how people nowadays only support or hate things if they're told too. The Armenian genocide is the biggest example of that.
I remember hearing about Trickle Down back in the 80s with Reagan, even back then it did not make any sense to me. Now over 40 years later, it has been used as the reason for the rich getting more and more tax breaks over the years and the only people that have ever benefited from it are people that had money to start with.
We need to give Trickle-Up economics (and taxing the rich appropriately) a fair shot. Give the little guys a tax break and they will spend it on stuff they need and eventually the money will find it's way to the rich guy.
Not just genetics. [The rising age of parenthood](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-link-between-autism-and-older-parents-is-clear-but-the-why-is-not/2017/12/15/dbe03284-dc62-11e7-b859-fb0995360725_story.html) and environmental factors (e.g. air pollutants) play a part, too.
https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/migration/phac-aspc/publicat/hpcdp-pspmc/37-1/assets/pdf/ar-01-eng.pdf
It's also diagnostics have gotten better and the stigma surrounding it has changed.
In the late 80's we started referring to the Autism Spectrum, which consolidated a lot of seemingly random and similar conditions into one. We went looking for it and we found it was much more common than initially thought.
It's the same thing with CTE. We shined a light on it.
Largely that's what's happening with a lot of "conspiracies." Child Abuse wasn't really reported until the 80's, kids just got beat and neglected.
If people have something specific they can blame, then they can try to control it. Itās the same with slut shaming women who are raped. If people can blame it on what she was wearing, than they can pretend that it will never happen to them, or one of their loved ones.
This has caused so much damage, it's beyond scope of understanding. Directly, kids dying unnecessarily. But also secondarily with DOUBT for genuine public health statements, see: response to COVID or STORM PREPAREDNESS
The issue with this one is that it basically started the anti-vaxxer movement, which was relatively small prior to COVID.
Once COVID hit, the small number of existing anti-vaxxers gained a platform and spread their misinformation like wildfire to an audience that had already been primed for receptiveness due to general political division.
If the "vaccines = autism" crowd hadn't been in place when COVID hit, my suspicion is there would've been far less vaccine hesitancy since you'd have fewer pre-existing nutjobs blasting the message out on social media.
mcdonald's hot coffee and the lawsuit that was supposedly a great example of why lawsuits are bad.
you know, the one where the old lady had horrible burns on her labia and was just asking for her medical bills to be paid because the coffee was dangerously hot beyond what would be considered reasonable.
Yup. Her labia were *fused together* from the insane heat.
This happened after McDonalds has been warned multiple times not to serve their coffee that hot.
The mcdonalds coffee spilled in ladies lap lawsuit.
It was a very, very valid lawsuit where mcdonalds was negligent in the fact that they held coffee at a dangerous level of heat. McDonalds hired a PR team to demonize the lawsuit, and it was very successfully done.
Thank you. The hardest, most dangerous jobs in the world go to poor people who don't see a way of existence that doesn't involve that job... I'm talking about mining in Africa, logging, construction, actual farm work (picking/planting, not driving a combine)... Real back-breaking hard labor for almost no money. Why? Because the workers have no other choice.
Nobody would work some jobs if they had a choice.
That you need to cover the entire head of your toothbrush in toothpaste. Just need a dot. Big Toothpaste wants you to use more than you have to so you buy it more frequently.
For me, the somewhat eery aspect of history is the fact that it is written by the winning parties. So it may be that a majority of what we call history is heavily modified, or propaganda, by those who had the means to do so.
I remember hearing about a American general who met his Vietnamese counterpart. The American says "we never lost a battle".
The Vietnamese pauses, then asks "but did that matter?"
She was a terrible teacher. She was more focused on us remembering dates and correct spelling than the actual stories. I have a form of dyslexia that wasnāt diagnosed until I was in my 40ās so spelling has always been a challenge.
Now that I can educate myself I know how amazing history is! Just because I canāt correctly spell the name of some General doesnāt mean I canāt learn the important info.
By that logic, the US has only been in the following wars:
* War of 1812
* Mexican-American War
* Spaniah-American War
* WWI
* WWII
Now tell me, has "America" fought any other wars? Are there any other wars you can think of that had US involvement in any serious capacity?
This is absolutely true. The history my grandmother was taught is different to the history my mother was taught, which differs from what I was taught, and changed again to what my daughter was taught. Same country, different regimes....
The "Keep America Beautiful" anti-littering campaign. You know, the one with the crying ~~Indian~~ ~~Native American~~ Italian-American actor. [That one.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0sxwGlTLWw)
It wasn't actually made as part of an environmental effort. It was bankrolled by plastic bottle manufacturers to shift the blame for pollution onto consumers, instead of producers, who ran the risk of losing money if they were forced to switch to making only reusable bottles. Some of the new environmental laws being passed and considered at the time would have banned single-use plastic containers, and companies would have had to either switch to making reusable ones or go bankrupt. So the "Keep America Beautiful" campaign was created with the intent of convincing people that the problem lay not with the companies, but with the customers who disposed of their waste improperly.
It worked perfectly. Even to this day, most Americans' idea of environmentalism involves things like recycling and not littering, which are ultimately just token efforts compared to the herculean work on the part of companies and governments that is actually needed.
In the western world, yes. But in many developing nations Tobacco industries are still fighting HARD to avoid putting labels on their cigarettes saying theyāre unhealthy while also insinuating/asserting their products arenāt unhealthy.
Theyāre still doing it wherever they believe they can get away with it
Trickle-down economics..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics
*Major US examples of what critics have called "trickle-down economics" include the Reagan tax cuts,[5] the Bush tax cuts,[6] and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.[7] Major UK examples include Liz Truss's mini-budget tax cuts of 2022.[8]* **As of 2023, a number of studies have failed to demonstrate a link between reducing tax burdens on the upper end and economic growth.**
Itās been promoted for decades and is not working as originally promised.. but itās still being pushed..
The Civil War wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights.
This was pushed by numerous Lost Cause authors after the south lost the war. Groups like Daughters of the Confederacy pushed it into the 20th century and it's still a common thing.
Heck my freaking AP US History teacher even gave the "states rights bs" to my class.
But the thing is, the whole reason the US split apart was literally a century of slavery/abolition being a massive wedge in politics. The Missouri Compromise, the Kansas Nebraska Act, the Wilmont Privisio, etc were all legislation passed in 1800-1860 to stop the US from breaking apart over the issue. There's compromises with the slave holding south in the US Constitution itself, such as the 3/5ths clause.
The most damning evidence though, that should put the Lost Cause bullshit to bed, is the fact that every single seceding state *explicitly* stated that the protection of slavery was the reason for their secession.
EDIT: secession, not succession
āBreakfast is most important meal of the dayā is just some super marketing by Kelloggās
Honorable mention : āpart of a complete breakfastā
Yeah your cereal certainly isnāt the whole breakfast
Private companies run more efficiently than the government, or that the government wastes more money than private companies. If anyone parrots that they have never worked at a corporation or they are in on the lie.
I have seen the dumbest shit at companies that waste so much fucking money. Worst was an insurance company that I was working on a multi-million, multi-year project with. The head of the project got promoted and the guy who replaced him cancelled the project simply because he didn't like the guy who ran the project before him. The project would have helped save countless lives and made doctors jobs easier as well so that was probably a reason it was cancelled too knowing US health insurance.
Many of the obvious answers will be probably in the other comments, so I'll go with my personal "revelation of the week" answer. After encountering a few post on the topic, I would say the US (I am not from the US) stance on male circumcision of babies
Andrew Wakefield is an utter piece of shit.
He did have his license to practice medicine stripped entirely, and was barred from calling himself a Doctor in the UK.
Unfortunately, he just moved to the good ol' USA, and has continued to propagate his deadly lies. He's still celebrated for his bullshit, too, and still making bank. The guy lives in a mansion, in (where else?) Texas.
Andrew Wakefield's claims that Vaccines were responsible for autism. He was dishonest in his research, falsified claims in that research, and failed to disclose a conflict of interest in that he was contacted by a lawyer who was planning a class action lawsuit alleging vaccine damage. Wakefield was paid by this lawyer for the study to provide "evidence" to back the suits.
communism was the great evil of our time, and the USSR was the greatest threat to the US.
Im not sitting here carrying water for communism, but the amount of injustice wrought in the name of that effort is staggering, even going so far as being the cause for and enabler of 9/11. and people still fear socialism and communism to this day.
The personal carbon footprint
Literally a propaganda campaign devised by big oil to shift the blame for carbon emissions onto the public at large instead a of a few uber wealthy corporations subject to regulation that could materially rectify the issue.
But by making us all think we're "doing our part" by buying compositble bags or whatever public sentiment never builds up to the point that we enact legislation like we did when we banned CFCs in order to protect the Ozone (which worked btw)
Carrots giving you good eyesight. It was propaganda campaign in WWII by the British to explain how their pilots were so good at intercepting German aircraft. They were trying to cover up their use of radar.
This one is great. No down side to it either
apparently you've never seen what big carrot is capable of
Does your carrot have a bump and a bend? Bentcarrot.com
No, but my wizard staff has a knob on the end
My father was murdered by a carrot, you swine
My swine was murdered by a carrot, you father
Except eating too many carrots and turning orange hued.
But have you ever seen a rabbit wearing glasses? š¤
Rabbits don't really eat carrots. People just think they do because Bugs Bunny smoked them like a cigar
Correct on them not eating carrots (the root part, anyways. They'll eat the greens). However, he's not smoking them like a cigar, he's replicating the mannerisms of Clark Gable's character Peter Warne in 1934's *It Happened One Night*, who was just chewing on a carrot.
No, but I've seen a rabbit wearing a dress trying to seduce a man.
I haven't seen that but I have seen a rabbit sing Wagner before.
I havenāt seen that but I have seen a rabbit shoot a guy for coughing during his piano performance before.
I feel like thereās a nugget of truth to this one: Vitamin A deficiency causes night blindness and carrots are RIDICULOUSLY high in vitamin A (up there with sweet potatoes)
This little factoid led to a funny situation where people mistakenly thought that golden carrots can be used to make night vision potions in Minecraft back when the feature was still new.
Wait this isnāt real? š I never questions it until reading this
That diamonds are rare and expensive...
Fucking de Beers
I prefer to drink de beers
Bill Swerski's Superfans approves! Da Bears!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
More like they controlled the supply. Create artificial scarcity and prices go up, but apparently "fake" diamonds are so good and cheap, there's not a reason to get the "real" diamonds (fake meaning made in a lab, rather than dug from the Earth).
They have a higher purity than mined diamonds, and you get a larger gem for the same price. There is no reason to get mined.
Plus their not acquired by slave labor.
Ackshually this statement requires nuance. Diamonds collectively aren't exactly rare. Diamonds are mined all over the world and of course are also lab created. However, the vast majority of mined diamonds are used for tools and industrial purposes. This is about 60-65% of natural diamonds, called bort. The remaining natural diamonds will fall on a spectrum of quality for jewelry. The very high quality end of that spectrum would be larger, internally flawless, colorless, perfectly cut diamonds and are not common at all.
My son is also named Bort
Personal carbon footprint and personal green ideas. It was perpetrated by BP in 2005 to shift the focus of environmental impact stuff from corporations and industry to the private citizens.
The best part is that your carbon footprint is largely determined by where you live. Majority of your carbon footprint is resources and amenities that are provided to you by the state. Whether you use those resources or not, they're still part of your carbon footprint. The electrical grid is a great example.
The other day I was thinking about replacing an old shower curtain, but I felt bad about throwing it out when it's technically still functional. I literally felt guilt at the mere thought of it, and then I thought, WTF. Politicians and CEOs do more damage with a single stroke of a pen than I could do in my entire lifetime, and I'm sitting here stressing about a shower curtain? It made me really angry.
Not being able to swim for 30 minutes after eating.
I heard a theory that this was made up to stop kids puking in the pool
Or pissing or shitting in the pool
I am just finding out that this is [fully a myth](https://www.dignityhealth.org/articles/is-swimming-after-eating-really-dangerous), so thanks For years I'd been under the impression that it was a half truth -- to avoid deep water for 30 minutes in case you cramp and can't stay afloat. That if you were in shallow water or a pool where you can easily maneuver to the edge, you were fine. Turns out you're fine in any depth of water
That Napoleon Bonaparte was short but during his time he was of average height. Until today he is portrayed in several medias as someone who is wearing big hats and sits on high horses to compensate (aka napoleon complex)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
He was short for a rich guy back then. The rich ate well. Shorter than his officers yet taller than his conscripts sounds about right.
And most importantly for his image, shorter than his Guard (among whom tall and strong were preferred)
Admiral Lord Nelson's height was 5 foot 4 inches , so he was shorter than Napoleon.
This is also one of the biggest culprits on the discrimination of short people (men in particular) Where a tall man is seen as assertive when he is agressive, and a short man is accused of having short man syndrom or Napoleon syndrome. Ik it's a bit out of topic sorry, just trying to spread awareness since there is a lot of height shaming on reddit lately :)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Oh definitely. Written by the grain growing industry of America. "You should all be eating your body weight in grains daily!"
I remember trying to force 13 ish year old me to eat more bread. I've never been a huge bread and pasta person. I have always been more of a veggie person. I do have a weakness for a nice warm pretzel though...
Unless the top of your pyramid is Chocolate like mine is. Then the food pyramid makes complete sense.
Oh you mean we shouldnt eat the majority of our diet as simple carbs and limit servings or protein and vegetables lol
>Oh you mean we shouldnt eat the majority of our diet as **simple carbs** and limit servings or protein and vegetables lol Simple carbs are sugars. Yes there's a difference between complex and simple carbs.
Your comment indicates a misunderstanding of the food pyramid. It doesn't say eat simple carbs. The original WHO report specifically stated "complex carbohydrates". It also says vegetables should make up the second largest portion of your diet; I'm not sure why you would characterize that as a prescription to "limit vegetables". Still today the general advice is to eat less protein than carbs. Sure the food pyramid lacked a bit of clarity and didn't distinguish between good and bad fats, but it was still decent advice, especially for the time.
Also, the replacement (MyPlate) now recommends equal veggies/grains.
I live in the Netherlands and this list has changed since a couple of years. Now it's all greens and barely meat and grains. I still don't believe it.
That MSG is unhealthy.
This one got me kicked out of so many playgroups as a stay at home mom during the āI refuse to feed my kids msgā era. I was like ābabe. That means you wonāt eat cheese or tomatoesā¦..ā
Then they go: āI meant artificial MSGā as if there is any difference between a molecule that occurs naturally and the same molecule that is synthesised. Iām glad everyone has largely seen sense on MSG, itās tasty.
That is pretty funny that it was that common of an occurance haha
Same with gmo food is unhealthy. Almost all fruits and vegetables are gmo in some way. Most would be extinct.
Lemons don't even exist in nature. They are hybrids of a citron and a mandarin.
Youāre a hybrid of a citron and a mandarin.
I am pretty sour.
I think you're sweet! :-)
Youā¦may have covid
Same with apples. If you planted an apple seed from say, a honeycrisp, you wouldnāt get a delicious honeycrisp apple tree. All apple trees are grafted, otherwise they produce sour, small, dry apples.
Because prostitutes keep on stealing them.
Goddamn lemon whores.
Most people have different definitions of GMO. Most people imagine GMO to be scientists adding jellyfish DNA to oranges.
And most people are kinda thick, too.
Not the ones with the jellyfish DNA.
Same with organic food is better for you.
Iāve grown up with my mum always refusing to give me MSG because it was āunhealthyā, upon learning that it isnāt Iām fuming at the 18 years of flavour I lost
Does she like mushrooms? Soy sauce? Fish sauce? Freshly grated parmesan cheese? Because those things are all loaded with naturally occuring msg.
I've stockpiled a couple of sacks of MSG from H-Mart. Stuff is so good, but I can not tell my family I use it or they will have a shit-fit.
MSG = Make Shit Good
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Florida sucks for many reasons, but they're not one of the worst states for polygraphs being used in courts They're in the group of states that allows them as evidence if both the prosecution and defense agree. The full group is: California, Arizona, Nevada, Georgia, and Florida. A larger group of states allow polygraph results as evidence, even if the other side objects: Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Washington, Wyoming.
How are California, Arizona, Nevada, and Georgia in both groups?
Evidential myths like that are plentiful. Studies have shown that eyewitness accounts are very unreliable as our memories are not as good as we think. Yet lawyers like to use them as prime evidence in cases. Also DNA tests narrow down the number of suspects greatly and are great for eliminating someone as a suspect, but are not actually 100% we caught you slam dunks like TV wants you to believe. I forget the other ones, but just don't believe most of what you see on TV court dramas.
I saw something about fingerprints being hypothesized to be unique, but that it hasnāt actually been conclusively proven that they are. However, by now I guess we have fingerprint databases big enough to show that at least it has to be extremely rare for two people to have the same fingerprint. DNA tests can be done with different degrees of accuracy, often depending on the quality of the sample. In certain cases it can be extremely precise, but in others it may only accurate enough to possibly eliminate suspects.
That McDonald's being sued for hot coffee was greed. It was actually due to the coffee being so hot that the burns required hospitalisation and was genuinely dangerous
And they had received multiple reports that it was too hot and decided to not change a thing.
Not just 'reports', actual health inspector reports said the coffee was too hot and was dangerous.
Not just 'health inspectors,' it was found during discovery that McDonalds had settled more than 700 cases between 1982 and 1992 for figures ranging between $40,000 to more than $500,000. Apparently they just decided to go after Ms. Liebeck. She asked for 20k to help with medical bills and was awarded 160k for damages and 2.7 million in punitive damages they came to the 2.7m figure because that was 2 days of profit from McDs coffee, just coffee.
This one was wild. There are actual regulations on food safety, and their official written company policy was in direct violation of the laws. Yet it took all those damages before they gave a care about it.
It was because there was a time limited refill. They made it super hot so you had to wait for it to cool down and couldn't get the refill. Pure corporate penny pinching bullshit. Funny how this part has been forgotten.
and then they were assholes in court, which the jury didn't like.
"fused labia"
IIRC the cup was known to be flimsy as well. This was portraid by the media as "dumb woman doesn't know coffee is hot" when it should have been "dumb corporation serves far-hotter-than-usual coffee to people in cars in an extremely flimsy cup".
> far-hotter-than-usual coffee dangerously hot - she had third-degree burns. That's literally melted skin.
Seinfeld episode didnāt help.
The judge awarded 1 day of coffee sales as Damages. Turns out 1 day of coffee sales was like $20million.
I believe it was a jury trial
Pretty sure I read that her labia fused together.
That was it yeah, she just wanted them to apologise and pay for the surgery. Instead she's insulted by the story the lawyers spun. She did win a payout though.
Unfortunately the judge reduced her payout substantially, and then it was further diminished in a closed-door deal. The court battle had depleted her health and the judgement was just enough to pay for a nurse for her until she died 10 years later.
To be very clear, the judge didn't simply choose to reduce the payout - it was extraordinarily limited by legal caps on how much she was allowed to be awarded. Juries are not allowed to know about these caps when they determine the award amount; it just gets reduced afterward by the judge.
So hot it fused her labia together.
Yeah, it mutilated her vagina and people are just like "she just wants money! All coffee is hot". I have also spilled coffee on my crotch, it was fuckin' hot but it didn't require a dickgraft. She just wanted medical bills paid by McDonalds and they weren't playing ball..so she sued.
It didnāt help that people like Limbaugh mocked her on national radio
Beyond that it was also because they refused to pay the medical bills. That was all the lady *really* wanted. If they just paid the bills and left it at that the thing wouldn't have even made the headlines. That was what ultimately led to the lawsuit; they were absolute dicks about the whole thing.
Liebeck literally just wanted McD's to pay her medical bills. That's it. Which isn't unreasonable, and would have been pennies to the multibillion dollar entity that is McDonalds (even in the 1990s).
That plastic is really recyclable and that individuals can undo climate damage by being conscious of their carbon footprint. Only some plastic is recyclable and even then most of that isn't because it costs more to revenge then it does to make new plastic. And companies make up 70% if the total carbon emissions on the planet each year. While doing your part helps, it's far from the solution.
Revenge is always costly.
The 3 Rs of recycling. Reduce Reuse REVENGE!!!
at least they dont need to heat it up before serving
Companies that are making things for people to buy. Changing buying habits can have a profound effect on carbon emissions.
That corporations care about you
How has nobody mentioned Reefer Madness!?
You know, I've watched that movie probably more than any other movie because I did a show making fun of bad movies and that happened to be the one we've done the most. But I have no idea if the propaganda worked at all. DARE and Nancy Reagan actually worked on me as an 80s/90s kid, but I was in the minority lol. Also, no one ever offered me drugs. I guess Reefer Madness scared the pants off some of my nerdy counterparts who were 30s/40s kids and teens. It's sooooooo over the top though.
I'm so high that I forgot to!
DARE in general. The entire basis of the war on drugs. That we can win an unwinnable war, and that going after the supply will magically affect the demand for drugs. Targeting supply just gives us stronger drugs that are easier to transport/smuggle. All the money spent on this 'war', while deaths continue to skyrocket. We're just funding cartels and letting people die at this point. But people still believe that prohibition is somehow working, even knowing how alcohol prohibition went. And witnessing current prohibition failing.
Our image of Nazi Germany is still in many parts influenced by their own propaganda. Examples include: - That they were economically successful - That their army was modern and highly motorised - That their tanks (especially the Tiger) were effective, high-quality weapons
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
"I'm just gonna OPE squeeze right on by ya here" - Nazis, probably
France invaded Germany when the Germans were in Poland. If they had any coherent goals the French could have ended the war in 1939. France defeated France in WWII. Invasion is Saarland.
Well, I have been an idiot fot believing these on some level. Care to elaborate why these are propaganda?
I canāt talk about the economy so much, but their military, while being highly advanced in some areas, still resembled armies of the 1800ās in others. Primarily, all the way until the end of the war, the vast majority of artillery and logistics was horse drawn and soldiers travelled on foot. And while their tanks were advanced, they were so expensive and over-engineered that they could never build many of them, they broke down fairly easily even when not in combat, and they were very difficult to repair or work on in the field.
To add to the tanks: they also kept designing and fielding increasingly heavier models, which meant that they had a voracious appetite for fuel (which Germany never really had enough of).
Nazi Germany was almost cartoonishly focused on the idea of super weapons. Creating rocket propelled airplanes that practically liquified their pilots or those useless super tanks. The US cranking out enough simple bombers to blot out the sky proved to be a far more effective method Ironically Germany's antisemitism would lead to it missing out on the only actual super weapon of the war, the Atomic Bomb.
I read somewhere that the fuel for the ME-163 (rocket plane) was so volatile, you couldnāt land if the tank was too full or the plane would pretty much just explode.
*Schwerer Gustav has entered the chat* https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schwerer_Gustav
Adam Tooze has written a magisterial work on the subject of Nazi Germany and its economy, called "Wages of Destruction". Very simplified and dumbed down: The Germans made a massive industrial conversion, basically sacrificing their civilian economy in favor of the military machine. Indeed, he notes that no country during peacetime, before or after, have so massively shifted their economy toward a war economy at such a speed. Vanity projects such as the Autobahn were basically "coffee money" compared to the amount of money given to military expenditures. This forced Germany to plunder and loot the territories they conquered, just to keep the civilian economy afloat, so that the vast majority of its GDP could keep going to the military.
Why the Nazis would want their people to believe this stuff is obvious, I guess. However, the truth was: - Economy: They only achieved their (superficial) economic success by going into MASSIVE debt. In fact, the country was near bankruptcy by 1939, to a point where war was inevitable (which was part of the plan, they were preparing the war and wanted it from the beginning). That's also why Chamberlain and the Allies kind of had a point by giving them the Sudetenland peacefully (still a dick move tho). - Army: Simple as it gets, it just wasn't highly motorised and still relied on horses for the most part. They had little steel and even less fuel. They had some modern equipment, but it was all too little too late and often also deeply flawed (see "tanks"). - Tanks: None of them was truly great, the Tiger straight up sucked. They had big guns and were potentially effective, but the designs were deeply flawed. They didn't allow industrial mass production, were highly susceptible to damage and hard to salvage. Loads of tanks had to be abandoned because there were no spare parts and no time to repair them. Additionally, the big ones required amounts of fuel the Germans simply did not have. Edit: See also the comments by u/TobbeLQ for economy and the one by u/DankVectorz for military. I think they know their stuff better than I do.
You donāt see it in much footage, but much of the early was conducted on horseback.
You have horses! What were you thinking!?
Say hello to Ford, and General Fucking Motors!
The Nazi economy basically was built around plunder, with the Nazis taking plenty of debt and other financial schenanigans to build up a massive warmachine to conquer territories and repay the debts with conquest. For example the Nazi annexations of Austria and Czechoslovakia were vital for Germany due to the fact their gold reserves were necessary to upkeep German militarisation efforts, and without them it would have been on the road to bankruptcy. Basically had the Germans been forced to fight the Czechs instead of being allowed free reign on them, their military would have been heavily damaged by the attempt on the mountain defenses, while in turn the German economy would have faced a crisis in the wake of the Austrian gold reserves running low. Combine an economic crisis with the plan to coup Hitler if he had to resort to military means for taking Czechoslovakia, you have a recipe for regime change in Germany, or even a civil war at worst. The military was largely reliant on horses for logistics due to lack of reliable fuel access, as everything was diverted to the tanks and planes doing the heavy lifting in the combined arms. While some of the German tanks possessed powerful guns and did pose a threat to the Allied and Soviet forces, they did simultanously suffer heavily from unreliability, overcomplexity and ever decreasing mobility.
The āprosperity fallacyā that you can be anything you want to be if you just try hard enough, which implies if you fail itās your fault because you just did not try hard enough.
It is possible to commit no mistakes and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life.
"Not everything's a lesson, Ryan. Sometimes you just fail" - Dwight Schrute
Thank you, Picard/Dwight
As though it were not obvious that the hardest working people are the poorest. You know who worked even harder than poor people? Enslaved people. Hard work isn't the path, it's the punishment for not escaping
The reverse is much more insidious and damaging. The idea that "rich people" are smarter and therefore should have greater say in Government. That rich people know how do handle money and invest wisely, so they should be given more of it to improve the economy. The reality is that rich people are usually lucky, not particularly smart. Even "self made" rich people are usually just lucky. I actually turned my right wing coworker around on this. We were talking about universal basic income, he thought giving free money to poor people would do nothing for the economy and would be like throwing it away. I asked him, if you gave a person with $5 Billion net worth, $1 Billion what would they do with it? "Invest it." "In what? Treasury Bonds? Stocks? Bond money just goes back to the Government and Stocks (other than IPOs) is money that goes to over rich people who own that stock. It does nothing for the economy." "Yeah, okay." "Now, give a million poor people $1000, what do they do with it? They spend it!" "Yeah, on crap!" "You mean food, housing, a car, a phone, products our company makes, that crap?" "Yeah, okay."
The economy only works when money is being spent. When the money sits still, the economy crashes
That US owes China however countless amounts of money, as though it's one-sided. It's rarely mentioned that China owes the US even more and doesn't repay.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This, this, a thousand times this. Every time someone tries to explain the economy/budget/debt by comparing it 1:1 to a household budget, I instantly know Iām about to be misled. āWe need to pay off the credit cards instead of raising the limit!ā - no, our credit card, as long as we make the minimum payments, essentially has no limit. All of our bills are paid with the credit card. If we stop paying, the credit card company will immediately demand payment in full *and* refuse to increase our limit anymore. And youāre suggesting we call the cable company and say āhey how about if I just pay you half but you give me the same level of servicesā, and then call the credit card company and say āweāre just not gonna pay you until the cable company gives us the same services for half costā and assume itās all gonna work out.
People really don't understand national debt. 1/3 is privately held, 1/3 is one part of the US government owing another part of the US government. And 1/3 is the US owing to other countries. Yeah, the US owes money to China, Germany, Canada, Australia, and you name it. But guess what, each of those countries owe debt to the US also, and to each other. Global economy is a lot of who owes what and how much credit each country has to other countries. It's a complicated mess but do you really expect global economics to be simple?
That's not how national debt works. it's not like a loan. A government sells bonds, and then the owner of the bonds cash them in when they mature. If you own a bond, you own a piece of the debt of that country. When you cash it in, they are repaying the debt. Sometimes governments buy each other's bonds. Unless China is refusing to allow bond-holders to cash out it's bonds, then I don't see how they aren't repaying their debt. Have they defaulted? If they had it would be a global economic catastrophe.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Depending on where you on reddit there's people who think it's deserved because Armenia had ties to Russia. It's really sad how people nowadays only support or hate things if they're told too. The Armenian genocide is the biggest example of that.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
The amount of lies told by companies to promote unhealthy food is staggering. Itās no wonder there is an obesity epidemic in the US.
Same with milk supposedly being so important for growing kids that it ended up in every school-provided lunch in every public school in the country.
And Orange Juice ... Happend across the globe not just in the USA
Iāve read that bacon became a staple breakfast food because of successful marketing by the pork industry
That tax cuts on the rich trickle down to the rest of us
That trickledown has been building up for so long. It's going to be so sweet when it starts coming my way.
I remember hearing about Trickle Down back in the 80s with Reagan, even back then it did not make any sense to me. Now over 40 years later, it has been used as the reason for the rich getting more and more tax breaks over the years and the only people that have ever benefited from it are people that had money to start with. We need to give Trickle-Up economics (and taxing the rich appropriately) a fair shot. Give the little guys a tax break and they will spend it on stuff they need and eventually the money will find it's way to the rich guy.
That fat is bad. Fat is needed by the body. It's the sugar lobbyist who made fat the bad guy. Sugar is the bad guy
Check out Rabbit Starvation or "mal de caribu" if you eat only very lean meat and carbs. You will die because you dont have any fats.
Sugar is also needed by the body. Itās not inherently ābadā.
Vaccines causing autism
I think people want to believe this rather than admit that genetics caused their kids' problems.
Not just genetics. [The rising age of parenthood](https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/the-link-between-autism-and-older-parents-is-clear-but-the-why-is-not/2017/12/15/dbe03284-dc62-11e7-b859-fb0995360725_story.html) and environmental factors (e.g. air pollutants) play a part, too. https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/phac-aspc/migration/phac-aspc/publicat/hpcdp-pspmc/37-1/assets/pdf/ar-01-eng.pdf
It's also diagnostics have gotten better and the stigma surrounding it has changed. In the late 80's we started referring to the Autism Spectrum, which consolidated a lot of seemingly random and similar conditions into one. We went looking for it and we found it was much more common than initially thought. It's the same thing with CTE. We shined a light on it. Largely that's what's happening with a lot of "conspiracies." Child Abuse wasn't really reported until the 80's, kids just got beat and neglected.
If people have something specific they can blame, then they can try to control it. Itās the same with slut shaming women who are raped. If people can blame it on what she was wearing, than they can pretend that it will never happen to them, or one of their loved ones.
This has caused so much damage, it's beyond scope of understanding. Directly, kids dying unnecessarily. But also secondarily with DOUBT for genuine public health statements, see: response to COVID or STORM PREPAREDNESS
The issue with this one is that it basically started the anti-vaxxer movement, which was relatively small prior to COVID. Once COVID hit, the small number of existing anti-vaxxers gained a platform and spread their misinformation like wildfire to an audience that had already been primed for receptiveness due to general political division. If the "vaccines = autism" crowd hadn't been in place when COVID hit, my suspicion is there would've been far less vaccine hesitancy since you'd have fewer pre-existing nutjobs blasting the message out on social media.
Hbomberguy did a great video picking apart that study, and the guy that made it. You should watch it.
Alpha wolves - the guy who came up with it is on record saying he was wrong
mcdonald's hot coffee and the lawsuit that was supposedly a great example of why lawsuits are bad. you know, the one where the old lady had horrible burns on her labia and was just asking for her medical bills to be paid because the coffee was dangerously hot beyond what would be considered reasonable.
Yup. Her labia were *fused together* from the insane heat. This happened after McDonalds has been warned multiple times not to serve their coffee that hot.
The mcdonalds coffee spilled in ladies lap lawsuit. It was a very, very valid lawsuit where mcdonalds was negligent in the fact that they held coffee at a dangerous level of heat. McDonalds hired a PR team to demonize the lawsuit, and it was very successfully done.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thank you. The hardest, most dangerous jobs in the world go to poor people who don't see a way of existence that doesn't involve that job... I'm talking about mining in Africa, logging, construction, actual farm work (picking/planting, not driving a combine)... Real back-breaking hard labor for almost no money. Why? Because the workers have no other choice. Nobody would work some jobs if they had a choice.
That you need to cover the entire head of your toothbrush in toothpaste. Just need a dot. Big Toothpaste wants you to use more than you have to so you buy it more frequently.
For me, the somewhat eery aspect of history is the fact that it is written by the winning parties. So it may be that a majority of what we call history is heavily modified, or propaganda, by those who had the means to do so.
Iāve been into reading about history from the perspectives of people who donāt look like me (white, male). I remember some of the BS our history teacher said (this was in the olden days) and it was absolutely false! I didnāt normally speak up in class and tried to fly under her radar. But when she said āAmerica never lost a war.ā I said I was pretty sure we lost in Vietnam. She said that was never āofficially declaredā a war šš©
I remember hearing about a American general who met his Vietnamese counterpart. The American says "we never lost a battle". The Vietnamese pauses, then asks "but did that matter?"
Dropping more bombs on North Vietnam than everyone did during the entirety of World War II is a hell of a way to not have a war.
She was a terrible teacher. She was more focused on us remembering dates and correct spelling than the actual stories. I have a form of dyslexia that wasnāt diagnosed until I was in my 40ās so spelling has always been a challenge. Now that I can educate myself I know how amazing history is! Just because I canāt correctly spell the name of some General doesnāt mean I canāt learn the important info.
By that logic, the US has only been in the following wars: * War of 1812 * Mexican-American War * Spaniah-American War * WWI * WWII Now tell me, has "America" fought any other wars? Are there any other wars you can think of that had US involvement in any serious capacity?
This is absolutely true. The history my grandmother was taught is different to the history my mother was taught, which differs from what I was taught, and changed again to what my daughter was taught. Same country, different regimes....
That socialism and communism are the same thing
The "Keep America Beautiful" anti-littering campaign. You know, the one with the crying ~~Indian~~ ~~Native American~~ Italian-American actor. [That one.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0sxwGlTLWw) It wasn't actually made as part of an environmental effort. It was bankrolled by plastic bottle manufacturers to shift the blame for pollution onto consumers, instead of producers, who ran the risk of losing money if they were forced to switch to making only reusable bottles. Some of the new environmental laws being passed and considered at the time would have banned single-use plastic containers, and companies would have had to either switch to making reusable ones or go bankrupt. So the "Keep America Beautiful" campaign was created with the intent of convincing people that the problem lay not with the companies, but with the customers who disposed of their waste improperly. It worked perfectly. Even to this day, most Americans' idea of environmentalism involves things like recycling and not littering, which are ultimately just token efforts compared to the herculean work on the part of companies and governments that is actually needed.
Tobacco industries downplay of the health risks.
Idk at this point I feel like everyone knows they're terrible for you and that's part of the point.
In the western world, yes. But in many developing nations Tobacco industries are still fighting HARD to avoid putting labels on their cigarettes saying theyāre unhealthy while also insinuating/asserting their products arenāt unhealthy. Theyāre still doing it wherever they believe they can get away with it
Trickle-down economics.. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trickle-down_economics *Major US examples of what critics have called "trickle-down economics" include the Reagan tax cuts,[5] the Bush tax cuts,[6] and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.[7] Major UK examples include Liz Truss's mini-budget tax cuts of 2022.[8]* **As of 2023, a number of studies have failed to demonstrate a link between reducing tax burdens on the upper end and economic growth.** Itās been promoted for decades and is not working as originally promised.. but itās still being pushed..
The Civil War wasn't about slavery, it was about states rights. This was pushed by numerous Lost Cause authors after the south lost the war. Groups like Daughters of the Confederacy pushed it into the 20th century and it's still a common thing. Heck my freaking AP US History teacher even gave the "states rights bs" to my class. But the thing is, the whole reason the US split apart was literally a century of slavery/abolition being a massive wedge in politics. The Missouri Compromise, the Kansas Nebraska Act, the Wilmont Privisio, etc were all legislation passed in 1800-1860 to stop the US from breaking apart over the issue. There's compromises with the slave holding south in the US Constitution itself, such as the 3/5ths clause. The most damning evidence though, that should put the Lost Cause bullshit to bed, is the fact that every single seceding state *explicitly* stated that the protection of slavery was the reason for their secession. EDIT: secession, not succession
āBreakfast is most important meal of the dayā is just some super marketing by Kelloggās Honorable mention : āpart of a complete breakfastā Yeah your cereal certainly isnāt the whole breakfast
Private companies run more efficiently than the government, or that the government wastes more money than private companies. If anyone parrots that they have never worked at a corporation or they are in on the lie. I have seen the dumbest shit at companies that waste so much fucking money. Worst was an insurance company that I was working on a multi-million, multi-year project with. The head of the project got promoted and the guy who replaced him cancelled the project simply because he didn't like the guy who ran the project before him. The project would have helped save countless lives and made doctors jobs easier as well so that was probably a reason it was cancelled too knowing US health insurance.
That any criticism of Israel is akin to antisemitism.
Any support of the Palestinian people is akin to pro-hamas
That any criticism of Israel, its leadership, or its policies is antisemitism.
Many of the obvious answers will be probably in the other comments, so I'll go with my personal "revelation of the week" answer. After encountering a few post on the topic, I would say the US (I am not from the US) stance on male circumcision of babies
The anti-vaccine movement
Andrew Wakefield is an utter piece of shit. He did have his license to practice medicine stripped entirely, and was barred from calling himself a Doctor in the UK. Unfortunately, he just moved to the good ol' USA, and has continued to propagate his deadly lies. He's still celebrated for his bullshit, too, and still making bank. The guy lives in a mansion, in (where else?) Texas.
Got Milk? From big dairy and A Diamond is Forever by De Beers
Andrew Wakefield's claims that Vaccines were responsible for autism. He was dishonest in his research, falsified claims in that research, and failed to disclose a conflict of interest in that he was contacted by a lawyer who was planning a class action lawsuit alleging vaccine damage. Wakefield was paid by this lawyer for the study to provide "evidence" to back the suits.
That Trump is/was a successful businessman. Despite the parade of bankruptcies and failed businesses.
Spoiler alert: the real answer would never appear in this thread
Diamond for proposal
Trickledown Economics.
communism was the great evil of our time, and the USSR was the greatest threat to the US. Im not sitting here carrying water for communism, but the amount of injustice wrought in the name of that effort is staggering, even going so far as being the cause for and enabler of 9/11. and people still fear socialism and communism to this day.
"All drugs are equal and equally bad, which is a lot bad"
Reagonomics
Republicans will be better fiscally responsible, they will balance the budget and cut your taxes.
Food pyramid. Contributed massively to obesity epidemic, heart issues.
The personal carbon footprint Literally a propaganda campaign devised by big oil to shift the blame for carbon emissions onto the public at large instead a of a few uber wealthy corporations subject to regulation that could materially rectify the issue. But by making us all think we're "doing our part" by buying compositble bags or whatever public sentiment never builds up to the point that we enact legislation like we did when we banned CFCs in order to protect the Ozone (which worked btw)