1186: "Bumblebees"

This forum is for the individual discussion thread that goes with each new comic.

Moderators: Moderators General, Prelates, Magistrates

User avatar
Himself
Posts: 157
Joined: Sat Aug 27, 2011 4:17 am UTC

1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Himself » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:20 am UTC

Image
Alt Text: "Did you know sociologists can't explain why people keep repeating that urban legend about bumblebees not being able to fly!?"

If I remember it correctly it all goes back to one guy getting his math wrong. Also, is this a reference to Bee Movie?
"Looking me am a civilization person"
-Ratio Tile

User avatar
rhomboidal
Posts: 796
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2011 5:25 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby rhomboidal » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:27 am UTC

Wow, that new pilot contract with American Airlines really went a weird way...

User avatar
da Doctah
Posts: 976
Joined: Fri Feb 03, 2012 6:27 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby da Doctah » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:27 am UTC

If God had meant bumblebees to fly, He would have given them boarding passes.

hypersapien
Posts: 13
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2008 10:54 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby hypersapien » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:38 am UTC

Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby keithl » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:40 am UTC

Himself wrote: ... urban legend about bumblebees not being able to fly!?"
If I remember it correctly it all goes back to one guy getting his math wrong.


Nah - it was an editing error. The original statement was about the impossibility of gathering nectar with airplanes.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby keithl » Fri Mar 15, 2013 4:44 am UTC

hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?


Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.

Istaro
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2009 6:00 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Istaro » Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:35 am UTC

keithl wrote:Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.


Aww, come on, that's like telling a joke minus the punch line.

User avatar
Envelope Generator
Posts: 582
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 8:07 am UTC
Location: pareidolia

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Envelope Generator » Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:56 am UTC

The bumble bee simply clicks on the desired seat in the chart.
I'm going to step off the LEM now... here we are, Pismo Beach and all the clams we can eat

eSOANEM wrote:If Fonzie's on the order of 100 zeptokelvin, I think he has bigger problems than difracting through doors.

FourTael
Posts: 55
Joined: Wed Apr 14, 2010 3:36 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby FourTael » Fri Mar 15, 2013 5:58 am UTC

keithl wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?


Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.


Oh, common ignorance, I hate you so.

I mean common knowledge.... Well, same thing.

Edit: I'm mostly interested in nutrition urban legends these days, but there are quite a few others that annoy me.

Eutychus
Posts: 446
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 6:01 am UTC
Location: France

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Eutychus » Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:10 am UTC

hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?
The explanation I have heard is that people tend to remember assertions rather than denials.

In other words, if you repeat an urban legend and then say "it's not true", the thing that sticks in people's minds over the long term is the original rumour and not the rebuttal. Firms that try to overturn nasty rumours about their products often end up actually spreading the rumour.
Be very careful about rectilinear assumptions. Raptors could be hiding there - ucim

User avatar
Linux0s
Posts: 247
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 7:34 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Linux0s » Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:38 am UTC

So the mysterious disappearance of bumblebees is due to the chemically adulterated con trails?
If the male mind truly were a machine it would consist of a shaft and a bushing.

User avatar
keithl
Posts: 658
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 3:46 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby keithl » Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:42 am UTC

FourTael wrote: Edit: I'm mostly interested in nutrition urban legends these days, but there are quite a few others that annoy me.


Hokay - One widely popular urban legend is that "natural" sucrose (cane or beet sugar, for example) is healthier than high fructose corn syrup.

The physiological effects of the fructose in both is identical, both are heavily subsidized by the Feds, and you should eat as little of either as possible. If you want something even worse, eat refined "natural fruit sugar" (almost all fructose, with the nutrients removed). Local honey is marginally better for you, but worse if it comes from places where they "sweeten" the trees so the bees (wow - on topic!) will pollinate them. Glucose is better for you, because your metabolism reacts properly to it, but it is not nearly as sweet. And Stevia - almost all from China these days - is so variable in composition that it is challenging to study for health effects, one major reason why there's been no reported problems with it.

The above is from a two hour lecture I attended last week by pediatric endocrinologist Daniel Marks. I expect at least one person to be offended enough to respond perjoratively. Should be amusing. Then I can respond with what I learned at a fluoridation lecture I heard tonight ...

User avatar
phlip
Restorer of Worlds
Posts: 7569
Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 3:56 am UTC
Location: Australia
Contact:

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby phlip » Fri Mar 15, 2013 6:48 am UTC

Eutychus wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?
The explanation I have heard is that people tend to remember assertions rather than denials.

In other words, if you repeat an urban legend and then say "it's not true", the thing that sticks in people's minds over the long term is the original rumour and not the rebuttal. Firms that try to overturn nasty rumours about their products often end up actually spreading the rumour.

IIRC it depends strongly on the wording... like, if you word it "Science can explain bumblebees' flight, contrary to urban legend", then it'll stick, but if you word it "Urban legend says science can't explain bumblebees' flight, but that's wrong", then for some people the only thing that'll stick in their memory in the long term is "science can't explain bumblebees' flight".

That is, you want to word it as positive statements that a thing is true (contrary to myth), not negative statements that a myth is false (quoting the myth directly), as it'll have a better chance of sinking in.

Also, obligatory link.

Code: Select all

enum ಠ_ಠ {°□°╰=1, °Д°╰, ಠ益ಠ╰};
void ┻━┻︵​╰(ಠ_ಠ ⚠) {exit((int)⚠);}
[he/him/his]

sotanaht
Posts: 236
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2010 2:14 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby sotanaht » Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:34 am UTC

Eutychus wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?
The explanation I have heard is that people tend to remember assertions rather than denials.

In other words, if you repeat an urban legend and then say "it's not true", the thing that sticks in people's minds over the long term is the original rumour and not the rebuttal. Firms that try to overturn nasty rumours about their products often end up actually spreading the rumour.


I was thinking it's more along the lines of if something is referred to as an "urban legend" it is pretty much by definition either totally false or a significant stretching of the truth. You always hear of urban legends being debunked because the true ones, or at least the ones believed to be true, aren't thought of as urban legends.

JustDoug
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:35 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby JustDoug » Fri Mar 15, 2013 7:48 am UTC

Himself wrote:If I remember it correctly it all goes back to one guy getting his math wrong. Also, is this a reference to Bee Movie?


Nah. The origin, as I've heard it (I worked from the Aerospace field) was that "normal" aeronautical engineering can't explain how a bumblebee flies when it's treated similarly to a fixed wing aircraft using the SOP methods, which got labeled as, "science can't explain..." Treated like you'd model a Piper Cub, a bee looks a lot like the proverbial lead brick. Airfoils, however, play little part in the role of getting the bee to fly, in actuality.

Physics At Large has been able to explain how a bee flies quite handily. The caveat is that you have to use the right parts to do the explaining with.

User avatar
snowyowl
Posts: 464
Joined: Tue Jun 23, 2009 7:36 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby snowyowl » Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:10 am UTC

Istaro wrote:
keithl wrote:Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.


Aww, come on, that's like telling a joke minus the punch line.

Cracking your knuckles doesn't cause osteoporosis, HDMI cables don't have any impact on sound quality, Islam does not promise 72 virgins to martyrs but rather an unspecified number to all who go to heaven, the assembly line predates Henry Ford, and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.
The preceding comment is an automated response.

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:24 am UTC

The way I'd always heard it at least implied that bumblebees can't fly because they're too fat for their tiny little wings. Which I don't even need to know any complicated physics to know is baloney; I can demolish it with science I learned on TV Tropes.

(It should be quiet in here for a while.)
Last edited by Steve the Pocket on Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:26 am UTC, edited 1 time in total.
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

tho74
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2011 7:20 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby tho74 » Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:25 am UTC

snowyowl wrote:
Istaro wrote:
keithl wrote:Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.


Aww, come on, that's like telling a joke minus the punch line.

Cracking your knuckles doesn't cause osteoporosis, HDMI cables don't have any impact on sound quality, Islam does not promise 72 virgins to martyrs but rather an unspecified number to all who go to heaven, the assembly line predates Henry Ford, and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


So you escaped the name calling by 7 urban legends :-) Reg. HDMI cables / sound quality: I object. Broken cable will kill sound, so the impact of cable quality might be binary, but it has an impact. (Ok, you could argue that a broken HDMI cable is not an HDMI cable anymore...)

User avatar
Steve the Pocket
Posts: 704
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 4:02 am UTC
Location: Going downtuuu in a Luleelurah!

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Steve the Pocket » Fri Mar 15, 2013 8:27 am UTC

Indeed — a broken HDMI cable is two HDMI cables!
cephalopod9 wrote:Only on Xkcd can you start a topic involving Hitler and people spend the better part of half a dozen pages arguing about the quality of Operating Systems.

Baige.

Afrael
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Sep 20, 2010 10:23 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Afrael » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:28 am UTC

Steve the Pocket wrote:Indeed — a broken HDMI cable is two HDMI cables!


Only if the HDMI cable in question is a perfect sphere. Then you can invoke Banach-Tarski.

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Klear » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:35 am UTC

sotanaht wrote:
Eutychus wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?
The explanation I have heard is that people tend to remember assertions rather than denials.

In other words, if you repeat an urban legend and then say "it's not true", the thing that sticks in people's minds over the long term is the original rumour and not the rebuttal. Firms that try to overturn nasty rumours about their products often end up actually spreading the rumour.


I was thinking it's more along the lines of if something is referred to as an "urban legend" it is pretty much by definition either totally false or a significant stretching of the truth. You always hear of urban legends being debunked because the true ones, or at least the ones believed to be true, aren't thought of as urban legends.


I think neither of the replies (including those not cited here) fit the question. For example - I heard that glass in very old windows eventually flows down, making the glass thicker at the bottom. Few years later I heard it was an urban legend. Sure, when I first heard the myth, I didn't know it was an urban legend, but when I heard it debunked, I remembered hearing it earlier.

hypersapien is saying that he never (or rarely) hears someone debunking something he had previously heard as a fact.

And I guess the answer is "Stop reading snopes all day, go outside and talk to people!" =)

Eutychus wrote:In other words, if you repeat an urban legend and then say "it's not true", the thing that sticks in people's minds over the long term is the original rumour and not the rebuttal. Firms that try to overturn nasty rumours about their products often end up actually spreading the rumour.


Isn't that just a rumour, though?

User avatar
AvatarIII
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:28 pm UTC
Location: W.Sussex, UK

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby AvatarIII » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:41 am UTC

snowyowl wrote:
Istaro wrote:
keithl wrote:Because all the currently popular urban legends are accepted as fact, not yet exposed as urban legends. We have more than ever, and if I listed a dozen here you would call me insulting names.


Aww, come on, that's like telling a joke minus the punch line.

Cracking your knuckles doesn't cause osteoporosis, HDMI cables don't have any impact on sound quality, Islam does not promise 72 virgins to martyrs but rather an unspecified number to all who go to heaven, the assembly line predates Henry Ford, and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


Wait, are you listing the legends that are actually false or the facts behind the legends?

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Klear » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:49 am UTC

snowyowl wrote:(...) and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


Sure, because Alice has never been connected to drugs in any way.

AllyPallyl
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:00 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby AllyPallyl » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:50 am UTC

The way I'd always heard it at least implied that bumblebees can't fly because they're too fat for their tiny little wings. Which I don't even need to know any complicated physics to know is baloney; I can demolish it with science I learned on TV Tropes.


I can demolish it by counter-example, which is easier.

User avatar
AvatarIII
Posts: 2098
Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2011 12:28 pm UTC
Location: W.Sussex, UK

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby AvatarIII » Fri Mar 15, 2013 9:56 am UTC

Economists can't explain how bumblebees can afford business class.

User avatar
SEE
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:58 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby SEE » Fri Mar 15, 2013 10:16 am UTC

But sociologists can't explain anything.

User avatar
xulaus
Posts: 136
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2008 11:09 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby xulaus » Fri Mar 15, 2013 11:36 am UTC

keithl wrote: If you want something even worse, eat refined "natural fruit sugar" (almost all fructose, with the nutrients removed).

I really don't see why fructose is a bad. Higher sweetness and equivalent effects on insulin and blood glucose levels when compared to sucrose. Low GI to boot. Seems like the perfect sugar to me.
Meaux_Pas wrote:I don't even know who the fuck this guy is

The Cat

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby The Cat » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:00 pm UTC

Well, I'm sure we can all agree that the Bumblebee is in the Left seat of the cockpit. Aka "Captain bumbles". One could only assume that the green hornet is flying copilot. Who is the navigator?

Showsni
Posts: 116
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:09 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Showsni » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:38 pm UTC

The Cat wrote:Well, I'm sure we can all agree that the Bumblebee is in the Left seat of the cockpit. Aka "Captain bumbles". One could only assume that the green hornet is flying copilot. Who is the navigator?


"I," said the Fly, "with my little eye, I'll be navigator."

User avatar
mathmannix
Posts: 1445
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 2:12 pm UTC
Location: Washington, DC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby mathmannix » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:42 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
snowyowl wrote:(...) and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


Sure, because Alice has never been connected to drugs in any way.


Not by people who actually knew what they were talking about.

Also, it is clear that a bumblebee wouldn't be able to fly a plane (for long)... it can only be in one place at a time. While most controls to keep a plane in flight might be on the yoke, that's only if nothing goes wrong and you don't have to take off or land or anything. Not to mention that the bumblebee probably isn't strong enough to adjust the yoke. (Of course, this could be accomplished by the bumblebee pushing the "autopilot" button, if there is one!) However, while bumblebees are not social insects, a swarm of trained honeybees working together might very well fly a plane, using their "hive mind".
Last edited by mathmannix on Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:55 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
I hear velociraptor tastes like chicken.

dp2
Posts: 346
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 3:06 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby dp2 » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:48 pm UTC

Can science explain why people call things "urban legends" that are more properly called "myths"?
Urban legend: The hook on the car door
Myth: Frogs give you warts.

qazwart
Posts: 6
Joined: Wed Nov 21, 2012 1:00 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby qazwart » Fri Mar 15, 2013 12:54 pm UTC

hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?


Because if it the urban legend was actually true, it would then be a scientific fact.

MetaThought
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Sep 09, 2011 4:49 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby MetaThought » Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:09 pm UTC

keithl wrote:The physiological effects of the fructose in both is identical


That, at least, is not true. There is some difference.

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/arch ... /91/22K07/

A Princeton University research team... has demonstrated that rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup -- a sweetener found in many popular sodas -- gain significantly more weight than those with access to water sweetened with table sugar, even when they consume the same number of calories

User avatar
Klear
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun Jun 13, 2010 8:43 am UTC
Location: Prague

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Klear » Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:25 pm UTC

mathmannix wrote:
Klear wrote:
snowyowl wrote:(...) and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


Sure, because Alice has never been connected to drugs in any way.


Not by people who actually knew what they were talking about.


I'm not saying that Carrol has written a book about drugs, only that by the time Super Mario was created, it has been firmly connected to them.

Wikipedia's list of common misconceptions states that "there is no evidence" to back that up and that the author denied it, though that's about as convincing as the claim that "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" has nothing to do with LSD.

It's possible the intent was not there (which would IMO require a dose of ignorance and/or some very bad judgement), but in any case saying that the shrooms in Mario are based on Alice does nothing to prove that they don't have anything to do with drugs.

qazwart wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?


Because if it the urban legend was actually true, it would then be a scientific fact.


The trouble with urban legends is that they are told as if they were factual, so it is very frequent that people hear them without anybody pointing out that they are in fact urban legends.

User avatar
CorruptUser
Posts: 10493
Joined: Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:12 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby CorruptUser » Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:28 pm UTC

xulaus wrote:
keithl wrote: If you want something even worse, eat refined "natural fruit sugar" (almost all fructose, with the nutrients removed).

I really don't see why fructose is a bad. Higher sweetness and equivalent effects on insulin and blood glucose levels when compared to sucrose. Low GI to boot. Seems like the perfect sugar to me.


Fructose itself isn't less healthy than glucose. The problem with fructose is that your body doesn't really know you ate it, so it doesn't sate your hunger, and you eat more of it than you would've had it been glucose.

Fructose in fruit only makes up roughly 10% of the sugars. High fructose corn syrup comes in several varieties, the most common being 55% fructose, much more than anything grown.

Barstro
Posts: 103
Joined: Mon Aug 13, 2012 2:34 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Barstro » Fri Mar 15, 2013 1:47 pm UTC

This reminds me of a scene from the cartoon "The Critic"

I hope posting a Youtube link is allowed;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=APIklM0wRg8

Harry Voyager
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2010 7:55 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Harry Voyager » Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:13 pm UTC

The way I heard the bumblebee story was some lecturer asked an aircraft engineer in the 20's or 30's if then modern engineering could explain how bumblebees flew. The engineer did a back of the napkin calculation, assumed that the wings were fixed and rigid bodies and some other approximations that I don't remember, and determined, under those conditions and approximations, bumblebees don't fly. Given that bumblebees don't fly like airplanes, this was not an entirely unreasonable result, and most showed that the available models didn't cover that flight regimen. The engineer had a good laugh and moved on.

The lecturer, on the other latched on to the "bumblebees can't fly" and repeated it ad nausium.

The real moral of this particular story is that science and engineering is really a collection of models and predictions of varying degrees of rightness, and when you find yourself in a situation where the results of the experiment don't match what the model predicted, it's a pretty good indication that your current model doesn't work there, and you'll need to make a better one if you want to work with that sort of problem.

User avatar
Someguy945
Posts: 189
Joined: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:09 am UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Someguy945 » Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:29 pm UTC

keithl wrote:Hokay - One widely popular urban legend is that "natural" sucrose (cane or beet sugar, for example) is healthier than high fructose corn syrup.


keithl wrote:Glucose is better for you, because your metabolism reacts properly to it, but it is not nearly as sweet.


So first you say it is an urban legend, and then you agree with it?

For anyone wondering what keithl might be referring to, a recent study showed that high fructose corn syrup may leave you hungrier, which could cause you to consume more total calories.
http://news.yahoo.com/corn-syrup-might- ... 00069.html

Zylon
Posts: 142
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2009 5:37 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby Zylon » Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:35 pm UTC

This would have been better as a Far Side strip. Comically oversized bee sitting in the chair, captain's hat on his head, bragging about about showing those naysayer physicists wrong. Well, something like that.

Instead we get this thing, so unsure of its own joke and/or artwork that he felt the need to tack "...airplanes" onto the urban legend.

RogueCynic
Posts: 401
Joined: Sun Nov 22, 2009 10:23 pm UTC

Re: 1186: "Bumblebees"

Postby RogueCynic » Fri Mar 15, 2013 2:35 pm UTC

Klear wrote:
mathmannix wrote:
Klear wrote:
snowyowl wrote:(...) and Super Mario eating mushrooms to grow is inspired by a scene from Alice in Wonderland and has nothing to do with psychoactive drugs.


Sure, because Alice has never been connected to drugs in any way.


Not by people who actually knew what they were talking about.


I'm not saying that Carrol has written a book about drugs, only that by the time Super Mario was created, it has been firmly connected to them.

Wikipedia's list of common misconceptions states that "there is no evidence" to back that up and that the author denied it, though that's about as convincing as the claim that "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" has nothing to do with LSD.

It's possible the intent was not there (which would IMO require a dose of ignorance and/or some very bad judgement), but in any case saying that the shrooms in Mario are based on Alice does nothing to prove that they don't have anything to do with drugs.

qazwart wrote:
hypersapien wrote:Why is it that whenever I hear some strange new urban legend for the first time, it's always in the course of someone saying it isn't true?


Because if it the urban legend was actually true, it would then be a scientific fact.


The trouble with urban legends is that they are told as if they were factual, so it is very frequent that people hear them without anybody pointing out that they are in fact urban legends.



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

The urban myth that "Lucy in the sky with diamonds" was about lsd was started by the Nixon administration to destroy the Beatles. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-lennon-files-the-fbi-and-the-beatle-429429.html
I am Lord Titanius Englesmith, Fancyman of Cornwood.
See 1 Kings 7:23 for pi.
If you put a prune in a juicer, what would you get?


Return to “Individual XKCD Comic Threads”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 25 guests