NOTE: This is a transcript of the False Facts podcast. Because of the deep state, the powers that be, the military-industrial complex, Big Audio, and the absolute refusal of Taco Bell to become our paid sponsor, we have been forced to release only the written transcript. The names of the co-hosts have been changed to protect their identity from the sound studio that produced several episodes of their podcast and now cannot get paid.
PAUL
Hello everybody, and welcome to the second episode of False Facts, the podcast that searches for the truth behind false facts.
In this podcast, we’ll dive into examples found in urban myths and folklore, in culture and politics, in classrooms, and in the home. We’ll explore things your mom told you and things you heard as a child, and we’ll examine widespread falsehoods that people repeatedly quote, some that were debunked long ago. And, we’ll take a peek under the hood of society’s most prevalent communication forms such as movies, television, and the internet.
PAUL
I’m Paul Vandelay, your co-host.
FRANK
And I’m Frank Vandelay, your other co-host.
FRANK
Together we’ll use our truth finder to provide you with the actual facts.
PAUL
And Frank, maybe we should ask the question: Why do people believe or continue to believe these false facts?
FRANK
I’m with you. So let’s dig in.
SEGMENT # 1 300 Movie and MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS Movie
FRANK
For this week’s episode, I thought we would begin at the start of the modern era, with the invention of cinema, which, as you know Paul, is one of the most popular ways to perpetuate myths and false facts. Now, there are many influential and popular movies we could discuss, going back to the 1915 blockbuster film, The Birth of a Nation.
PAUL
I never saw it but judging by the controversy surrounding the film, and we could spend hours dissecting its supposed historical facts. Can we stay in the 21st century, where we’re more knowledgeable about movies?
FRANK
Great idea! Let’s look at the 2006 movie directed by Zack Snyder and starring Gerard Butler. The movie is called 300 because it’s based on the 300 heroic Spartans who fought valiantly against thousands of Persian warriors in the epic Battle of Thermopylae in 480 BC. The Persian victory allowed for King Xerxes' passage into southern Greece, which expanded the Persian empire.
Did you see the film, Paul?
PAUL
I did, and I loved the battle scenes. If this movie is to be believed, then warriors back then spent half their time in battle and the other half in a gym. Those guys were ripped!
FRANK
Aside from depicting the heroism of the Spartans, the film’s director decided to enhance their appeal by showing their buff bodies instead of accurately depicting the iron or bronze equipment typically worn by warriors at that time.
And here’s another interesting tidbit: Spartan garments, which they wore over their equipment, were red. Do you know why? It’s because red hid the blood of wounded Spartans – that fact comes from the legendary Spartan legislator, Lycurgus. He also claimed that red negatively affected their enemies in battle.
Also, Leonidas never met the Persian King Xerxes, and for the first few days of the Battle of Thermopylae, the 300 Spartans were joined in battle by Greeks from other city-states, including 400 Thespians and 300 Thebans. Many historians believe Leonidas sent away the other Greeks after Xerxes discovered the goat path that allowed the Persians to surround the Greeks for two reasons. First, to minimize Greek casualties and, secondly, to secure great honor for Sparta and to secure the glorious reputation of the Spartans as soldiers.
PAUL
That’s interesting but what’s more interesting to me is that even back then armies were playing mind games with their enemies.
FRANK
Agreed, and it’s probably because the Spartans were outnumbered. Today, the Battle of Thermopylae is celebrated as an example of heroic persistence against seemingly impossible odds. The Greeks built a stone lion in honor of those who died and for their fallen king Leonidas.
(MUSICAL INTERLUDE?)
FRANK
Picking up on the theme of impossible odds, see if you can comprehend these odds, Paul. What’s the likelihood that two rulers related by blood would be mortal enemies? And what if they were women and fighting over the same sovereign land?
PAUL
I’d say that you have the raw material for a great story.
FRANK
And you’d be right, one that Hollywood turned into a 2018 movie called Mary Queen of Scots with Saoirse Ronan and Margot Robbie. And while the filmmakers did stick to the basic script, they took artistic liberties fictionalizing the dramatic tension between the two red headed royals.
This story is a gripping biopic about Mary, Queen of Scotland, and Elizabeth, Queen of England and Ireland, two cousins who reigned in the 16th century. The film depicts the tensions rising from their differences in religion - Catholic vs Protestant - and their lineage: House of Tudor vs the House of Stuart. Another significant difference between the two: Mary opted for marriage and a baby; Elizabeth remained unmarried and childless. They did however, share one thing in common: they were female rulers in a world dominated by male monarchs.
PAUL
They are fascinating historical figures! And the movie does show the truth in their story that in the age of patriarchy, women rulers were undone by the men who served them. Maybe that’s why the filmmakers thought to include a theatrical face-to-face scene showing Mary pleading with Elizabeth to stop the fighting and unite as sisters to survive in a man's world.
FRANK
Actually, they did agree to a meeting, but it was canceled before they could meet because of events in France related to the outbreak of the wars of religion. Eventually, Elizabeth succumbed to false evidence or you could say “alternative facts” fed to her by her male advisors and sentenced her cousin to execution in 1587.
Here’s one more false fact from the movie. You may think that the Queen of Scotland would have had a Scottish accent, right? Wrong. Mary grew up in France and therefore would almost certainly have had a French accent, unlike Mary in the film which sounds very Scottish indeed.
PAUL
False facts and all, there are a lot of lessons one can draw from this historical incident. But I guess the top one is that blood is not thicker than water.
FRANK
I would agree with that, and by the way, I’ve contacted my attorney about the $25 dollars you borrowed from me in 1996
(MUSICAL INTERLUDE)
SEGMENT # 2 CORIOLIS EFFECT
FRANK
Okay, Paul, what’s next.
PAUL
I’ve got one for you. And it’s a doozy. How about the tall tale that when a toilet flushes in the Northern Hemisphere, it spins in the opposite direction than one in the Southern Hemisphere?
FRANK
I’ve heard that one for decades but have never visited the southern hemisphere to personally verify that.
PAUL
You can save yourself the cost of an airplane ticket because science has again shed light on a false fact.
And of course, science has given this myth a name: the Coriolis Effect – sounds like a curse by a Greek god, doesn’t it? According to the Coriolis Effect, air and water flow patterns are affected by the earth’s rotation. An object that moves along a north-south path will appear to veer to the right in the Northern Hemisphere but to the left in the southern hemisphere.
This effect also works on water but only if the volume of these fluids is extremely large.
So unless you have an amusement-size toilet, you will not see the Coriolis Effect in your privy.
FRANK
That makes sense and punctures a big hole in the plausibility of one of my favorite 2013 movies: the Escape Plan starring Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger. Great supporting cast too. Anyway, in the movie Stallone was able to determine the location of his prison ship by watching the path of the water in a toilet as it slid into the drain. He told his fellow inmates that water goes counterclockwise above the Equator” and was able to determine that the ship was in Morocco!
PAUL
Another example of the movies playing fast and loose with science. And all this talk of water, has me thirsty. I’ll be right back.
FRANK
Hey, before you come back, check the toilet for the Coriolis Effect.
Sound of a toilet flush.
SEGMENT # 3 WORKING OUT
FRANK
Okay, we’re back. So far in this episode, so we’ve talked about 300 Spartans wearing only red capes in battle, two cousins as queens of neighboring countries battling for peace and dominance, and porcelain commodes which, when flushed, do not identify one’s hemisphere. What other myths and false facts are we talking about today?
PAUL
Weightlifting, something you do regularly, right?
FRANK
I do but I don’t have a lot to show for it. Possibly too much cheating.
PAUL
Who doesn’t cheat. For me, cheating is a guilt-free reward for being so rigidly disciplined. Have you heard the common myth that working out with weights adds bulk to your physique?
FRANK
Yes, I’ve heard friends and sports enthusiasts say they don’t want to start lifting weights because they’ll get all jacked up. But I’m proof that it’s not true. Just check out my muffin top belly and flabby arms.
PAUL
Yup, I can verify that. I’ve seen the evidence up close.
Lifting weights or doing other activities, such as push-ups and some types of yoga, 2 or 3 days a week may help you build strong muscles, but it will not bulk you up. Only intense strength training, along with specific genes, can build large muscles.
FRANK
So help me understand this better.
PAUL
Muscle hypertrophy is the adaptation our muscles experience from continual exposure to progressively overloaded forms of resistance training, which then results in an increase in our muscle fiber size, both in diameter and length. Essentially, muscle hypertrophy is the process through which our muscles get physically larger through the act of strategically consistent and harder workouts.
Remember, effort is one of the most definitive drivers of muscle gain over time. So if you want to get jacked, you’ll have to lift consistently, intensely, and by adding more weight.
FRANK
There was a time in my life when I did want to get jacked up and set some pretty aggressive weight lifting goals, like 300 pounds.
PAUL
Hmm. Did I know you during that time, or was this just a well-kept secret? Or, is this the dream you had after watching the Escape Plan? Never mind. Don’t tell me. I’ll just pretend you were once an aspiring Schwarzenegger. Hasta la vista, baby.
(MUSICAL INTERLUDE)
SEGMENT # 4 CATHERINE THE GREAT’S DEATH
FRANK
Paul, let’s switch gears and travel back to Europe for a peek at another enduring historical myth. How much do you know about Catherine The Great, who ruled Russia from 1762-1796?
PAUL
Well, I just read about this. She wasn’t Russian, and that the current Czarina at the time, Elizabeth, chose her to be wife to Peter, her nephew, and heir apparent.
FRANK
Correct. Their marriage had an unhappy beginning and end. After a few unsuccessful years of trying, they agreed to have other partners. Peter’s infertility was confirmed when Catherine bore children.
PAUL
And that was just the start of his bad luck, right? Is it true that Peter’s popularity further plummeted because of some unpopular decisions with the military and the nobility?
FRANK
It is true. Both groups came together and revolted against Peter. He abdicated, and Catherine was proclaimed sole ruler. During her three decades as czarina, Catherine expanded Russia’s borders and made it one of the most powerful players in global politics. But it’s that same power that also made her the victim of misogynistic myths, including bestiality, nymphomania, voyeurism, and a love of erotic furniture. In fact, historians say that there were few themes of sexual deviance that were not invented about the empress of Russia.
PAUL
So, the story that she died when the harness suspending a horse above her with which she was to have alleged bestial sex broke is false?
FRANK
I think that this particular myth is fascinating - not for the deviancy aspect - but because horse riding, which was linked with notions of nobility, subverted Catherine’s noted equestrian skills. The truth about her death is quite ordinary, in fact. Her obituary would have read that she died of a stroke in bed.
PAUL
It’s fascinating that ambitious, powerful men of nobility would turn against someone who solidified or expanded its country’s dominance just because this person was a woman. It’s unfortunately predictable that any woman who wielded political power in a patriarchal society would have been subjected to accusations of sexual deviance or voracity, either during her reign or posthumously. And considering that they were served by male courtiers, I’m assuming that female rulers had to fiercely guard their private lives to retain their power.
FRANK
Not surprising that these types of defamatory allegations go way back to Cleopatra and up through Anne Boleyn, Catherine de Medici, and Queen Elizabeth, who we talked about earlier. I’m guessing that Elizabeth presented herself as a “virgin queen” to avoid this kind of speculation. Misogyny was commonly accepted and practiced, even by Catherine’s son, who, upon becoming emperor, passed an edict forbidding women from ascending to the Russian throne.
PAUL
It’s a sad reflection on our supposed enlightened times that misogyny still exists today.
FRANK
I wholeheartedly agree. If history shows us anything from these myths, it’s that we – as individuals and society - can and should do better.
SEGMENT # 5 CAESARIAN SECTION
FRANK
Finally, Paul, we get to our last segment: fact or myth: Is the childbirth method known as the Caesarian Section given its name because that was how Julius Caesar was born?
PAUL
Hmm. That’s a good one. I would say that being Caesar gave him power over many things, starting with how he entered this world. So yes.
FRANK
Nice try, but Caesar was born in a customary way by natural birth. The surgical birthing procedure Caesarian section, known more familiarly as a C-section - draws its name from a law - Lex Caesarea – which stated that a child is to be cut from the womb if the mother died during childbirth. Apparently, the ancient world had precedent for C-section births, though it's unknown if the procedure had a statistically significant survival rate for the mother.
PAUL
Now, why couldn’t a c-section be named after a powerful female ruler like Cleopatra? It could be short for the Cleopatrian section.
WRAP-UP SEGMENT
FRANK
So, that’s a wrap for this podcast, Paul. I hope our listeners and our readers enjoyed it.
PAUL
I know that I learned a few exciting things that I’ll be sure to bring up with my co-workers at the water cooler.
FRANK
Or, more appropriately during this pandemic, while you’re refilling your water glass from your home refrigerator and talking to Moochie, your dog.
PAUL
Sad but true. What can our listeners expect to learn about in our next episode?
FRANK
In the next episode, we will be going more controversial.
PAUL
Such as?
FRANK
The historical truth about mask-wearing.
PAUL
I’m looking forward to exploring the centuries-old advice - and practice - that a little shot of alcohol can help you sleep at night, as sworn to by Aunt Mary.
FRANK
Then, we will talk about stupid criminals and how they relate to the Dunning-Kruger Effect.
PAUL
The one I’m interested in is the myth that millions of boyfriends subscribe to that Valentine’s Day was invented by greeting cards and flower companies.
FRANK
I’ve been saying that for years.
PAUL
Well, if you believed it so much, did you ever buy Hallmark stock? No, I guess not.
Well, I’m looking forward to seeing you all again next time.
FRANK
Take care, everyone, and be safe.
(MUSICAL INTERLUDE)
Try the Taco Bell Chicken Taco Sandwich. It's a taco and a sandwich!
Did you read this, Taco Bell? You can still be the sponsor of our podcast?
Comments
Post a Comment
Thank You for your input and feedback. If you requested a response, we will do so as soon as possible.