Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Re: Things we remember...

0 views
Skip to first unread message

Robert Carnegie

unread,
Nov 7, 2009, 5:48:13 PM11/7/09
to

Mike Ash wrote:
> In article <hcuogn$juo$1...@charm.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>,
> na...@math.ohio-state.edu (Anthony Nance) wrote:
>
> > Mike Ash <mi...@mikeash.com> wrote:
> > > Conclusion: they get more wrong than they get right, by a pretty wide
> > > margin. I'm sure some of this varies from person to person but I don't
> > > think I'm extremely non-representative here. I remember coming across a
> > > link to the Class of 2013 list earlier in the year and being pretty
> > > impressed by it. Now I have *serious* doubts about the validity of any
> > > of these lists. If the 2002 list is this badly wrong, the rest probably
> > > are too.
> >
> > On the one hand, I wouldn't extrapolate too much from one data point,
> > especially when it was their first go. If memory serves, that first
> > list was intended solely for internal use as a simple reminder to
> > profs & administrators to watch their references. It would vary from
> > person to person, but believing that a small number of people would
> > miss a reference would certainly make me think twice about using it.
>
> The list *probably* works as advertised, but I think the way it's worded
> could lead to unfortunate misunderstandings. IMO, not being a university
> educator or anything and thus not really in a position to criticize,
> this list would do better if it stuck to more factual statements. For
> example, "The Challenger exploded when they were only 6 years old",
> rather than, "They do not remember the Challenger explosion". This
> leaves it to the individual's judgement and leaves room for individual
> variation.
>
> I think the really interesting take-away is just how poorly someone can
> judge the experiences and knowledge of someone much younger. I can
> completely understand why someone would think I was not aware that
> Americans were held hostage in Iran. I was six months old when they were
> released, after all. They missed the fact that there was a major event
> which came later which drew attention to the previous hostage crisis. It
> has to be very difficult to predict which major events or products will
> make an impression on young children and which ones won't, when you
> yourself were a fully grown adult when they occurred.

I think many people still want the business of the Iran/Contra
hearings to be forgotten, and, like evolution, they spend great effort
on not believing that it happened. Including freshmen raised in
families with strong views on the topic.

> Amusing meta thought: am I being too harsh on them because I'm checking
> their facts in 2009, when every single item on the list can be
> investigated in 5 seconds on the internet, but they wrote it in 1998
> when available internet sources were vastly inferior, and non-internet
> sources vastly slower?

Shall we have a separate list of "Things you don't know about although
they used to be everyday knowledge and today you could look them up on
the Internet but why would you?

The /origin/ of the word "bikini" denoting a (barely recognisable)
costume?

Butch Malahide

unread,
Nov 8, 2009, 2:16:01 AM11/8/09
to
On Nov 7, 4:48 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> Shall we have a separate list of "Things you don't know about although
> they used to be everyday knowledge and today you could look them up on
> the Internet but why would you?
>
> The /origin/ of the word "bikini" denoting a (barely recognisable)
> costume?

That one's not going to stump anyone atoll. What I don't understand,
though, is how somebody could "invent" the bikini in 1946 when we have
pictures from classical times of women working out in bikinis.

erilar

unread,
Nov 8, 2009, 1:08:50 PM11/8/09
to
In article
<4098a4da-c9b3-47d4...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
Butch Malahide <fred....@gmail.com> wrote:

There are some on a floor in the remains of a Roman villa in Sicily I
visited last spring.

--
Erilar, biblioholic

bib-li-o-hol-ism [<Gr biblion] n. [BIBLIO + HOLISM] books, of books:
habitual longing to purchase, read, store, admire, and consume books in excess.

http://www.chibardun.net/~erilarlo

Robert Carnegie

unread,
Nov 9, 2009, 12:36:20 PM11/9/09
to
On Nov 8, 6:08 pm, erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> In article
> <4098a4da-c9b3-47d4-b7ac-b2aff7c1b...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,

>  Butch Malahide <fred.gal...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Nov 7, 4:48 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> > > Shall we have a separate list of "Things you don't know about although
> > > they used to be everyday knowledge and today you could look them up on
> > > the Internet but why would you?
>
> > > The /origin/ of the word "bikini" denoting a (barely recognisable)
> > > costume?
>
> > That one's not going to stump anyone atoll. What I don't understand,
> > though, is how somebody could "invent" the bikini in 1946 when we have
> > pictures from classical times of women working out in bikinis.
>
> There are some on a floor in the remains of a Roman villa in Sicily I
> visited last spring.

Why don't you pick up after yourself?

But I think for many years no one knew what was on the floors of Roman
villas in Sicily. I guess it was that long before they decided to buy
a new carpet.

And in the meantime, the twentieth century bikini. The one that looks
like a waistcoat and cutoff trousers. ...Maybe I'm misremembering.
Or it's that I'm British and that's as far as we went.

Robert Bannister

unread,
Nov 12, 2009, 8:01:27 PM11/12/09
to
erilar wrote:
> In article
> <4098a4da-c9b3-47d4...@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com>,
> Butch Malahide <fred....@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Nov 7, 4:48 pm, Robert Carnegie <rja.carne...@excite.com> wrote:
>>> Shall we have a separate list of "Things you don't know about although
>>> they used to be everyday knowledge and today you could look them up on
>>> the Internet but why would you?
>>>
>>> The /origin/ of the word "bikini" denoting a (barely recognisable)
>>> costume?
>> That one's not going to stump anyone atoll. What I don't understand,
>> though, is how somebody could "invent" the bikini in 1946 when we have
>> pictures from classical times of women working out in bikinis.
>
> There are some on a floor in the remains of a Roman villa in Sicily I
> visited last spring.
>

Is it known who dropped them?

--

Rob Bannister

erilar

unread,
Nov 13, 2009, 11:06:44 AM11/13/09
to
In article <7m3pf7F...@mid.individual.net>,
Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:

It's a mosaic, needless to say. And it's later than the other floors in
the place.

David DeLaney

unread,
Nov 13, 2009, 10:21:10 AM11/13/09
to
erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> Robert Bannister <rob...@bigpond.com> wrote:
>> erilar wrote:
>> > There are some on a floor in the remains of a Roman villa in Sicily I
>> > visited last spring.
>>
>> Is it known who dropped them?
>
>It's a mosaic, needless to say.

Oh, so it +broke+ when they dropped it.

Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.

0 new messages