Comment on Can you think of any now?
argh_another_username@lemmy.ca 6 hours ago
It’s a collaborative site.
I like it, though there wasn’t a single one of the false facts that I was taught in schools.
“Dinosaurs shed their skin all at once like snakes”
“Girls are naturally not as good at math as boys”
I don’t mean to be rude, but If this was taught in your school, everyone around you is probably a moron.
Yeah, the concept is nice, but it tells me that the Big Bang doesn’t explain what happened before it (the leading hypothesis is that the Big Bang started time, so there is no “before”) and sources a Wikipedia article on spiders. Then, it cites the common myth about Daddy Longlegs being highly venomous, says that that wasn’t dispelled until 2020, and then cites a fucking BuzzFeed listicle.
The fucking MythBusters did an episode on that like 20 years ago.
Buzzfeed out here doing the real work
Yeah I didn’t get taught any of the stuff mentioned for me either.
One thing I did notice that wasn’t mentioned was the tongue map, that I was taught about in the 90’s - you know the one that said that your tongue has different areas for detecting different kinds of tastes - sweet at the front tip, sour at the back, that kind of thing. All bullshit.
I remember even testing that one out as a kid, finding it was not true, observing that it obviously wasn’t true, and bringing it up my experience to my teacher. “No” was basically the only response I got. How did a myth like that catch on when it was so easily testable by literally anybody?
Ageism, it is always implied that adults are the ones right - because what adult would accept a child to disprove their logic?
It’s also one of those myths which people forget after a year; and even if its encountered again, it is treated as insignificant.
Yeah I think that the “you have to discharge your batteries entirely before charging them” would be a better fit, even though it wasn’t false at the time, but the technology changed
You still occasionally should, let it go all the way to dead, but for calibration reasons instead of safety reasons
“Planet X (Planet 9) exists and explains gravitational pull”
Weird conspiracy theories were not taught at my school.
Also:
In 2017, a photograph appeared to prove that Amelia Earhart survived her plane crash and was taken prisoner by the Japanese. However, it was later proven that the photo was taken two years before her disappearance, leaving the mystery unsolved.
Updated understanding emerged around 2010
The updated understanding emerged 7 years before the photo appeared?
This is why websites need downvotes.
Where did you go to school? I’ve never heard of either of those before.
In Denmark.
Ah sorry, I totally misread that lol!
I think a lot of those are highly dependent on where a person went to school and who their teacher was, because some of them are pretty far out there.
Cool but flawed website.
Earlier times dont include myths that are on later years.
There is no overlap in myths between 1990 and 1970-80 but there is with the 60sw
“Sugar causes hyperactivity in children” is mentioned to have been corrected around 1995 but stops making the list from 1980 onward.
I wanna recommend it to others but i cant in this state.
Just put in 2010 and most of everything it said is incredibly obvious. Plus some of the dates of updated sources seem really incorrect. For example, one of them is it is a myth that most oxygen comes from trees, but I very distinctly remember my math teacher of all people saying in 2006 or 2007 that when he was in school he corrected people that it’s mostly from plankton. And even if I’m misremembering this, he definitely said something about it being from plankton in those years, but it says the updated sources are from 2020.
It says that it is a myth that the big bang theory explains where the universe came from but in 2020 we found out it doesn’t explain what came before. Like… No? That’s always been what it is. Sure, it’s always been a Christian talking point to sort of say that, but then why say 2020?
But I guess it’s hard to really gauge what should and shouldn’t be included. I remember my 5th grade teacher telling me that Robert E. Lee was an honorable man. I don’t really remember exactly what all she said and if she got deeper into Lost Cause rhetoric than that, but she definitely said Lee was a “good man.”
What you were taught
“Mobile phones will never replace desktop computers”
What we know now
Mobile devices became the primary computing platform for billions of people worldwide.
That isn’t a response to the initial statement at all, which is very much an opinion or prediction rather than any claim to be a fact. I’m suddenly feeling pretty sceptical about this website.
I think it’s a neat idea but probably needs more contributors and for people to be a bit more critical with things. For example, an obvious one, I don’t see it mention that Pluto is no longer classified as a planet. That would be a great thing to mention, especially if you talk about things we used to consider planets but don’t any longer. [Ceres](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceres_(dwarf_planet) is another example of this. In 1801 it was discovered and considered a planet until sometime in the 1950s (it seems like it wasn’t an all-at-once shift).
Pluto was reclassified as a dwarf planet due to not clearing its orbital path.
Why would they just lie about Pluto like that?
#Pluto4Lyf
Part of the reason Pluto’s classification hit so hard in the US is that it’s the only ‘planet’ ever discovered by an USian astronomer. That national pride made the 2006 decision sting more than elsewhere. Some of the top figures from the AAS even challenged the legitimacy of the decision afterwards.
US pride, again.
Huh. I don’t think national pride that was a factor in my disappointment. I was more sad because 9 is a better number than 8, and Pluto is just a cute little guy.
I care that it is draconian nonsense. It wasn't created by planetary scientists, or by consulting any. It was primarily created by a highschool teacher in Temecula California. It is temporally incongruent. Saying it is not a planet then calling it a planet in the following name is an oxymoron, or rather just moronic. And it impedes real science and science communication depreciating the era and discoveries that have happened.
The real definition of worlds is by gravitational differentiation and the point at which a body is dominated by geology.
No object is ever defined by external factors. It is a fundamental elementary logic failure to attempt to do so. If you drive your car in a bicycle lane and clear out all the cyclists, what the &%$# object is defined. Absolutely nothing! You may define a condition here, not an object, not a noun! The fact that this definition even exists is an epic embarrassment that makes the entire field look like a bunch of dogmatic clowns.
That definition exists because if you want to include Pluto and be consistent you have to include dozens of other bodies.
Years since graduation:
Oh fuck this site!
Goddamn I’m old
Both 1960 and 2020 are showing the same 6 facts, and the facts shown were debunked years before 2020
Cool site but sadly the link for “Learning styles (visual, auditory, kinesthetic) determine how you best learn” being debunked is both dead and missing from archive.org
I’d really like to know more since I’ve very recently been learning about very similar processing modalities for ADHD brains
Still, cool site and resource!
merc@sh.itjust.works 7 minutes ago
IMO, that site needs more cold war propaganda myths.
For example:
Myth: The US won WWII
Truth: The biggest battles of the last few years of WWII were between Germany and the USSR, and the USSR won, pushing the German army back to Berlin.
–
Myth: Unions are communism, and therefore bad.
Truth: It is thanks to Unions that we work 8 hour days instead of 12 hour days, and that we have a 2 day weekend. They’re an essential part of balancing the power of the rich against the power of the workers.
–
Myth: Unions hold back the most skilled, so if you’re skilled or smart you shouldn’t be in a union.
Truth: The best actors in the world are members of SAG-AFTRA. They negotiate deals where they make tens of millions per movie. The union doesn’t hold them back. It just means that when the film studios try to screw over the less powerful actors and the union votes to strike, the rich and powerful actors need to do their part to help the less powerful actors out.