{paginate}
1 of 1
{/paginate}
Botul-ism?
Posted: 13 February 2010 11:25 PM   [ Ignore ]
Senior Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  620
Joined  2005-06-30

French philosopher Bernard-Henri Levy fell for a “well-rigged hoax” and cited philosopher Jean-Baptiste Botul, the author of “The Sex Life of Immanuel Kant” in his recent book. Only problem: Botul is made up. LAtimes link.

Wikipedia page, translated from the french.

I can’t figure out how he fell for this one. A web search might have solved all his problems before they started.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2010 11:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  61098
Joined  2005-04-14

Oh, I’ve heard of and seen this sort of thing happen a number of times in the past.  It’s no different than the various well-respected publications printing as fact the fake history of bathing in the United States.

 Signature 

“If any man wish to write in a clear style, let him be first clear in his thoughts.”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 February 2010 06:50 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  15023
Joined  2006-08-16

Iiiiiiimanuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable…

*Cough*

Sorry.

 Signature 

Attention to detail: An apostrophe is the difference between a company that knows its shit and a company that knows it’s shit.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 February 2010 10:26 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2065
Joined  2005-12-05
Tah - 14 February 2010 11:50 PM

Iiiiiiimanuel Kant was a real pissant who was very rarely stable…

*Cough*

Sorry.


OK.  At least I’m home today and can sing that over and over instead of just letting it run through my head all day

 Signature 

Space…..it seems to go on and on forever, but then you get to the end and the gorrilla starts throwing barrels at you. - Phlip J. Fry

Profile
 
 
Posted: 16 February 2010 10:08 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Five Star Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  6930
Joined  2005-10-21

It is a good tune.

 Signature 

1: Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. If it does what it says, you should have no problem with this.
2: What proof will you accept that you are wrong? You ask us to change our mind, but we cannot change yours?
3: It is not our responsability to disprove your claims, but rather your responsability to prove them.
4. Personal testamonials are not proof.

What part of ‘meow’ don’t you understand?

Profile
 
 
   
{paginate}
1 of 1
{/paginate}