debunking efforts

this isn't really that cool, but I figured I might as well post it.

I got one of those cute/clever e-mails that always float around, and got the itch to do some debunking. So here it is, with my acidic comments in red.

HistoryMystery

Have a history teacher explain this----- if they can.

How about a wanna-be math teacher/history buff

Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress in 1846.

John F. Kennedy was elected to Congress in 1946.

Just because there is an even hundred years between anything, does not make those two events statistically related. The number is arbitrary - it would be just as coincidental had they been elected 104 years apart.

Abraham Lincoln was elected President in 1860.

John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960.



Both were particularly concerned with civil rights.

Both wives lost their children while living in the White House.

Both were Politicians who were living in times when civil rights were key national issues of debate.

Both had wives and children during periods of history when child mortality wasn't as good as it is today (though even today we rank really low in that statistic compared to other industrialized nations).

Both Presidents were shot on a Friday.

Both Presidents were s hot in the head

The head is a good place to shoot someone if you want to assassinate them, and Friday is a good 'going out' day for the public, making it a good public exposure day for Presidents.

Now it gets really weird.

So you claim.

Lincoln 's secretary was named Kennedy.

Kennedy's Secretary was named Lincoln.

Notice the capitalization of one and not the other - not nearly as coincidental when you're talking about two names out of a whole staff full of 'secretaries' and 'Secretaries'.

Both were assassinated by Southerners.

Both were succeeded by Southerners named Johnson.

Zealots are known to breed in the South, where Old-timey really means something.

Furthermore, LBJ was born in Texas while A.J. was born in North Carolina. It's hardly a coincidence that two reform-oriented Presidents trying to get elected during periods of Southern Black foment would choose moderate Senators from States South of the Mason-Dixon (where half of the States are anyway, again mitigating the impact of the statistic).

Andrew Johnson, who succeeded Lincoln, was born in 1808.

Lyndon Johnson, who succeeded Ken nedy, was born in 1908.

Same analysis as before, one hundred years, though it has a larger tick on the year ruler, that is only because of the base-10 number system we use. Imagine if it was 66 years and 6 months - what would we say then?

John Wilkes Booth, who assassinated Lincoln, was born in 1839.

Lee Harvey Oswald, who assassinated Kennedy, was born

in 1939. Gotcha! according to Wikipedia, John Wilkes Booth was born on May 10, 1838.

Both assassins were known by their three names

Both names are composed of fifteen letters.

Both assassins, as you say, were assassins and therefore wacked in the head with delusions of grandeur which no doubt kept them from wanting to be addressed as 'John' and 'Lee'. Infamy has a way of making the sinister people sound more sinister. Even if they did refer to themselves as Lee and John, the press would certainly rename them. My name is composed of Seventeen letters - I suppose all names average pretty normally to between twelve and twenty-two letters, though that is merely a guess. If both of their names had been Thirty letters each, I'd be surprised.



Now hang on to your seat.

(...because we can stretch connections in a few more places)

Lincoln was shot at the theater named 'Ford'.

Kennedy was shot in a car called 'Lincoln' made by 'Ford'.

It would be weirder if President Ford had been shot in a Theater called 'Lincoln', but okay, there is some degree of unusualness in this one.

Lincoln was shot in a theater and his assassin ran and hid in a warehouse.

Kennedy was shot from a warehouse and his assassin ran and hid in a theater.

Where Kennedy was shot from is still in debate really, unless dozens of eyewitnesses lied.

Booth and Oswald were assassinated before t heir trials.

This seems to indicate that there were conspiracies behind both of the assassinations and the murder of the assissins was carried out by this third unknown party. Well, yeah, either the pissed of crowd would get them to make sure justice was done to someone who'd robbed a country of their most precious figurehead in times of profound struggle, OR the President of a huge country had pissed off enough rich people to make themselves more valuable dead than alive to the crooks that live amongst us and want do-gooders to get harm.

And here's the kicker...



A week before Lincoln was shot, he was in Monroe, Maryland.

A week before Kennedy was shot, he was with Marilyn Monroe.

I notice you don't go ahead and say he was 'in' Marilyn Monroe. But, sorry, if fifteen letters in their respective names is significant for John and Lee, then the fact that one of these has a 'y' and a 'd' while the other has an 'i' and one less 'a' places it out of the 'WOW' category. How many cities are named Monroe, and how many people who know Presidents have the last name Monroe. More than a couple.

WHO FIGURED THIS OUT?



INCREDIBLE

This one is strange... more commentary at the bottom.

1) Fold a NEW $20bill in half...









2) Fo ld again, taking care to fold it exactly as below







3) Fold the other end, exactly as b efore









4) Now, simply turn it over...









What a coincidence! A simple geometri c fold creates a catastrophic premonitionprinted on all $20 bills!!!



COINCIDENCE?



YOU DECIDE I DID.

I Decided that the symmetry of the twin towers is easy to reproduce with any landscape bordered by hedges or trees, especially when you have your pick of footage from the twin towers and a wide array of camera angles to choose from.

What's really funny is that the address typed in on the twenty dollar bill is a porn-link phishing hole, who are probably the very people that created this compellingly drafted, but unfortunately B.S. laden advertisement flyer.

Phillip Bunker

The Union-America Stone Begins It's Roll

My favorite part of Obama's Inaugural Address so far (is that the right term for it?):

...

"What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them — that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works — whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. Those of us who manage the public's dollars will be held to account — to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day — because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.

"Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control — and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our gross domestic product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart — not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.

...