View previous topic | View next topic

Great Program/shame about the research

Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

Mostly Harmless
32653.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:45 am Reply with quote


Last edited by Mostly Harmless on Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total

32658.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:15 pm Reply with quote

Perhaps they meant he wasn't rushing.

32660.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:28 pm Reply with quote

Wow, QI must be terrile for 4 or 5 mistakes. Give me a break...

32661.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:32 pm Reply with quote

Iím sure the elf responsible for the Lenin quote will give a full explanation soon, but I wonder if the quote was referring to Leninís ethnicity. I donít think there is much doubt that he was born in Russia.

Looking around the net, it seems to be accepted that he was one-quarter Chuvash, one-quarter Kalmyk, one-quarter German, and one-quarter Jewish. (some places say he was helf-german, others replace Turkish for Chuvash - but a quick search will show many sites which question his Russian ethnicity)

However IMHO itís a bit picky to say someone who was born in Russia was not Russian, irrespective of their ethnic origins. If he was still around, he would surely be eligible to play for the Russian Beach-Volleyball team.

On the other hand, Stalin was not Russian (Georgian), neither was Trotsky (Ukranian) and indeed Catherine the Great was born in modern day Poland, and Nicolai Gogol was also Ukranian, all these are often thought of as Russian thanks to the conglomeration of states which was the USSR.

Finally on the subject of Henry Fordís (mis)quote, Flash has covered this here:post 32211

I think the quote by the Henry Ford museum is pretty damning, but QI is meant to encourage debate and question "common knowledge" and your point about historical quotes being difficult to nail down is certainly a decent one in my opinion.

32669.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:41 pm Reply with quote

Thanks eggshaped.

32674.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 12:54 pm Reply with quote

We said we couldn't find any evidence that Henry Ford ever said of the Model T: "You can have any colour you like so long as it's black" and we couldn't.

Nor could we find any reason why he would have said it if, right from the beginning, the cars were made in a range of different colours.

Shame about the research?

In what regard?

32678.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:08 pm Reply with quote

The statement "Lenin was not Russian" appears a string of one liners in the QI Philosophy section, the intention of which is simply to show that the world is much more complicated than it seems.

It is not intended to be the answer to an exam question.

Eskimos do not rub noses. The rickshaw was invented by an American. Joan of Arc was not French. Lenin was not Russian. The world is not solid, it is made of empty space and energy, and neither haggis, whisky, porridge, clan tartans nor kilts are Scottish.

Clearly, you can easily pick holes in any of these statements if you so choose, but they are not meant to be taken as the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Nothing is ever that simple Ė the same point that garf rightly makes about the attribution of quotations.

32693.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 1:46 pm Reply with quote

As eggshaped pointed out, even a cursory Google by a quite interested party can easily find out that Lenin had a complex, mixed and not wholly verifiable ethnicity.

Serious researchers, though, assert that Lenin was German-Jewish-Kalmyk-Russian by ancestry, though the Kalmyk (Mongol) element in his blood dominated his physical appearance.

The information was originally drawn from the QI database which has a number of entries under the heading 'nationality' showing that, for example, Wellington wasn't English (he was Irish), neither Napoleon nor Joan of Arc were French (he was Corsican and she was from Alsace-Lorraine) that, as eggshaped points out, the leaders of the Russian Revolution, though they all lived in Russia, were far from being pure Russians.

Only one of Lenin's grandparents was Russian (his paternal grandfather) and though Lenin was born in Russia, where you are born doesn't necessarily prove anything Ė your ethnicity,the language you speak or what you call yourself may all be something else.

I wouldn't call myself Russian, for example, if I had one Russian grandparent.

32717.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 4:50 pm Reply with quote

I think this is a very heartening thread, because garf has up his sleeve a list of quotations which are inextricably linked with well-known people in the public consciousness, but for the authenticity of which there is actually NO evidence, and in a couple of minutes he's going to post them, and earn a round of applause.

I can't hardly wait, me.

Mostly Harmless
32724.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:14 pm Reply with quote


Last edited by Mostly Harmless on Mon Jan 09, 2006 10:21 am; edited 1 time in total

32787.  Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:52 pm Reply with quote

<standing ovation>

32805.  Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:31 am Reply with quote

Mostly harmless wrote:

As I understand it, QI exists because the people who make it happen both on this board and elsewhere are curious about what is Quite Interesting, and to that end a lot of resources are used to share what we find to be so.
If you find something here you can challenge, by all means do so but then we expect you to provide your own research as verification. It's a two-way process. Take time to read what gets posted here and join in properly; I'm still new myself and I've found it very much worth my time.

Two points excelently raised, if you take a look here Piers Fletcher gives an insight into what is and isn't QI, it seems that Garf has taken the view that the show is the exact opposite of what it is, I would reckon he/she has probabley only seen the show once or twice and formed an opinion about the QI attitude on that basis.

It's obvious that the poster hasnt even bothered to look round the board/site, there is a list of the sources regularly used by the researchers, amongst others Snopes is included. So are a number of other renowned encyclopedic sites, all of which would give credence to any "pub argument". The research that we see here is only a small part of what makes up the show so I would suggest you take a little look into the background before trying to debunk an entire thinking ethos with little or no research.

33153.  Mon Nov 21, 2005 8:02 am Reply with quote

Thank, Andy. Well said.

33273.  Mon Nov 21, 2005 3:02 pm Reply with quote

Here here! Even if there happened to be one small mistake (I'm not saying that there was, but for argument's sake), I doubt it's a good basis to say "shame about the research." I think the researchers work hard. Maybe garf could do better? Find enough research to back a whole series?

33309.  Mon Nov 21, 2005 5:38 pm Reply with quote

JumpingJack wrote:
Thank, Andy. Well said.

You're very welcome. I know I struggle to find intersting snippets for QQ, There's an awful lot of research for a show that goes uneditted for around 45 mins to an hour. It was like the poster was saying the show is chucked together without any of the groundwork


Page 1 of 2
Goto page 1, 2  Next

All times are GMT - 5 Hours

Display posts from previous:   

Search Search Forums

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group