That's a lot of 47's!
was there a sale on 47's when this analysis was done? I smell cod-statistics... very fishy!
Chronologically-challenged Brits think that Robin Hood, Biggles and Sherlock Holmes were real people while questioning whether the likes of Winston Churchill, Montgomery of Alamein and Mahatma Gandhi ever walked this Earth. The shocking findings were uncovered by British TV station UKTV Gold, which is funny, as anyone who …
I certainly didn't get asked any questions like this. Although, I don't watch any of the dross that is broadcast by any of the TV stations, so I probably don't fit into their metric - having a brain being the biggest disadvatage.
The duffle coat with the books in the pocket please - no not the Daily Star, the books!
I'd love to see the questionnaire which produced these somewhat dubious statistics. As the article mentioned, Dick Turpin was indeed real, not a fictional character as he seems to have been dubbed by the survey. Likewise, Lady Godiva is 100% real. There's no evidence she rode on horseback naked, but that hardly makes her a work of fiction.
If the survey simply asked 'are these people real or fictional', you could make an excellent case for Robin Hood and King Arthur too, however many fictional myths have grown up around them since.
That some people doubt the past existence of Winston Churchill is terrifying. These people may also question that WWII ever happened or that the rise of the Third Reich was merely "internal German political turmoil".
PS. UKTV does not operate the History Channel (or Hitler Channel as it has become known). It does however operate the far more interesting and diverse UKTV History.
Most of Florence Nightingale's reputation is mythical, and a lot that is said of Churchill almost has the status of myth. At the distance from here to the first crusade, it's hard to see how Richard I can be anything other than a mythic figure. Richard III probably didn't have a hunched back, either.
... and since less than 1% of the population regularly watches UKTV Gold (97% of statistics, like this one, are made up on the spot) we are most certainly talking about a very thin scraping from the floor of humanity.
Perhaps the polled all 100 bone fida subscribers, of whom 47 said yeh, 47 said nae and 6 said "will you be my SPECIAL friend"?
Actually, looking at the umbers... 23, 34, 47... that's damned close to a poll of 11 people. Now, on a more serious note, where is there an IT OR a Paris angle to this story?
FYI on Freeview UK TV History (Ch12) is "history".. after 6pm. Then the slot switches to Dave (Ch19).
Dave is sh*te and I was really getting into the repeats of Secret Army on History, one of my favourites from the 70's, but can't get them after 6pm now.
Not all repeats are crap, and don't mention Allo Allo ... please!
That a Nobel prize winner thought should be 'told the plain facts' of research into climate change so that they could 'make their own minds up', based on a conscientious and thoughtful study of the scientific findings.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha
The dead vulture because I want to die.
I seem to recall from other coverage that this was a poll of the under 20s. Now 47% of respondents reckon Eleanor Rigby really? How many do you think have heard the name? Actually I suspect that what actually happened was that the suckers were presented with a list of names and a column marked real and a column marked fictious.
None of the respondents had heard the name so there was a rough 50-50 split.
I was on some touchy-feely make-a-circle-and-think-peaceful-thoughts junior management bollocky-wollocky type thing.
One of the tasks was to take personality types such as "manipulative" "power-hungry" "dictatorial" and give an example of a person who met these criteria. For that example, 7 people chose "Cat Slater", and me and the other bloke said "Adolf Hitler".
4 of the other people had never heard of Hitler and 1 remembered him as being something to do with the First World War, "because me Grandad talked about him".
For the record, I beleive Cat Slater is a soap character, but no idea as to which.
Paris.... just because.
if you make the assumption that most people on el reg have jobs, and that no one here has been polled (or at least admitted to being polled), then you can safely conclude that this poll was performed during working hours.
if anyone was watching tv between 9-5, and was so busy they phoned/texted in their answers, i'd put money on the respondents being benefit thieves.
er.. i mean... "long term sick".
maybe if the last question was 'have you paid any income tax this decade', you'd get a fair idea of the type of people you're polling.
on second thoughts, if the penultimate question was 'are YOU a mythical person', you'd probably realise why this questionnaire is utter bullshit.
... the leather one with the tweed patches. (like homer simpson, i ruined *two* perfectly good jackets)
"then you can safely conclude that this poll was performed during working hours."
I actually inhabit that mythical utopian nirvana of working from home *, and have done for almost three years now, and I'm not on the TPS list, despite having registered several times, and I can vouchsafe that no pollsters AT ALL have phoned me, ever. There's something suspicious about that. **
OTOH I usually don't have the TV on during the day, and when I do, the volume is turned down. In case any hippies are reading this, I should point out that my desk faces away from the TV, rendering this a total waste of energy, and I only do it so that your children will have to wander hungry over the barren, plastic bag strewn earth in the dystopian future.
* Yes, this really means that I don't have to wear pants if I don't want to.
** OK, not really. But when I used to work in a 'proper' office, (e.g. one where pants were compulsory) I used to get mithered all the time by people phoning up with annoying surveys.
Almost every time I tune into the "Hitler" Channel, it's showing a documentary about WWII. And it's true that history repeats itself.
As for thinking Gandhi was fictional, Albert Einstein predicted as much:-
"Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this ever in flesh and blood walked upon this earth."
(Paris, because she's so yesterday.)
To be fair, there's a lot more evidence that the likes of Robin Hood and King Arthur did work than there is the contrary.
Of course they didn't exist in the god-like forms that many stories would have you believe, they weren't exactly super heroes but they likely existed as people important to their time in history.
It's not unreasonable therefore to suggest you believe they were real people, arguably there is more proof of their existance than there is of any god and the stories are of course even more plausible yet billions of people believe in some diety or another.
It's likely that people like Osama Bin Laden will become similar legends in a 1000 - 1500 years time to some people in the middle east with little existence as to whether he was really real or not!
"I sub-edit, write and make sure you lot all play nice"
Oh dear. For a sub-editor that's really not good enough. The word you are looking for is 'nicely'. It's a member of the rapidly-disappearing family of adverbs. The majority of them end in -ly, and they describe or modify verbs, advectives and (not many people know this) other adverbs.
The key question regarding whether Robin Hood and King Arthur existed is whether their legends are based on the activities of one man, or a bringing together of numerous disparate tales, legends and anecdotes, fusing the lives of several individuals (with plenty of blatant myth thrown in) as a single person. Entire books have been written on whether they're 'real' or not. Whichever position you take, it's hardly fair to reduce the question to a couple of tick boxes and laugh at those who answered 'yes'.
And there's no excuse whatsoever for their considering Dick Turpin and Lady Godiva fictional on the grounds of a couple of made-up anecdotes about them. Presumably they think Richard III disappeared from history on the day Shakespeare lied about him having a hunchback.
Actually, no I don't look down on Americans, a lot of them are taller then me.
And to rise to the Flame Bait, I'll admit I found Dave a bit confusing, but then why is one guy's name more ludicrous than two guys names? Like Morgan Stanley f'r instance.
We have more than one Orange here in the UK. But then you have Apple.
And 3 is only one character shorter than 3M.
3 was originally Hutchison and they went with the 3G phone thing. I remember when it was supposed to be launched (3 Mar 2003 but they missed the unmoveable deadline on that one) I wondered how they'd promote a company that you couldn't search for on the net.
And while we're on 'ludicrous' names, what about Freddie Mac? Freddie Mac who? Can't even form a decent Scots surname properly!
So funny , that according to this survey many people in the UK cannot tell fantasy from fiction just like their very own gullible and stupid politicians they have chosen to represent them too !
Ah the 21st century the new age of propaganda has arrived and "idiocracy" is just around the next bend !
Paris because she has more brains then most of the entire combined batch of 600 or so UK elected politicians that have chosen by lottery to represent us !
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019