• fool@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    13 days ago

    The “we have more than 5 senses” insistence, while interesting, misconstrues what is typically understood as a “sense” by the average person.

    When children are taught what the 5 senses are, i.e. seeing, hearing, touch, taste and smell, these are more literary senses than scientific ones. (In another vein, it’s like disagreeing whether a tomato is a vegetable, fruit, or both – scientists and cooks have different definitions!)

    Proprioception, the unconscious spatial perception of your body parts, falls under “feel.” Hunger and thirst do, too. I feel hungry, I feel that my leg is below me, I feel off-balance. These scientifically-defined senses fall under one literary sense or another.

    Since this is just a mangling of definitions, it’s almost irresponsible to call the five-senses thing a misconception. That being said, it did interest me; did you know that endolymph fluid in our ears uses its inertia to tell us what’s going on when we turn our heads? ツ

  • PDFuego@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    A couple of these are interesting, but for my own sanity I have to refuse to accept most are commonly believed at all. Some are myths either way, like Satan ruling Hell or not isn’t real so it’s kind of a strange thing to include. I think the only one that really surprised me is the banana tree one, which is some interesting trivia but is so pedantic that if someone said that to me in person I’d just want to leave the room.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      14 days ago

      The banana argument is dumb, too, because there is no taxonomic definition of what a “tree” even is.

      I’ve also commonly heard “Palm trees aren’t actually trees, they’re grass,” which is correct from a taxonomic standpoint but ignores the fact that “tree” isn’t an official classification of anything. It’s simply a term applied to any tall plant with a woody trunk, which banana definitely counts among.

      • 0ops@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        Like when people say that spiders aren’t bugs. Bug isn’t a scientific term, it’s just slang for creepy-crawlies. They usually mean that spiders aren’t insects.

  • Fonzie!@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    Jezus, this is bad.

    So many of these are widely known and make up a misconception that doesn’t exist (bananas not on trees… you don’t say??)

    Others are bad plays at words (we have 5 external senses, people often leave the external part out when they talk, so what?)

    And then some are just weird, like the great wall of China being nature (and not visible from space, why go after a random joke from the 90’s?) or how the sizes of the circles are so unnecessarily different, sometimes overlapping with the text

    Just all around, this is bad

    EDIT Oh, and some are even wrong (bats’ vision is so bad compared to humans that they’d be legally blind; sugar gives a energy boost I’m not sure wtf the text is on about with ADHD; evolution is a theory, it just is)

    • Pohl@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      14 days ago

      The sugar one drives me nuts. Like yeah sugar doesn’t cause DSM-5 “hyperactivity”. Like of course not! It does give a little energy boost. And the rugrats will use the highly available energy and become a hilarious unmanageable dufus for a half hour or so.

      If you actually thought that candy was going to give your child a diagnosable psychiatric condition… you’re a huge fucking idiot. If you haven’t ever noticed that giving a kid a bag of sour patch kids gets them riled up, you haven’t spent much time with kids.

      • Dashi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        14 days ago

        Yeah, that’s the one that has me doubting the entire list. My kids do get a “sugar high”.

        The wording they use is off and may be technically right. but if we are going based off the wording they use i don’t think it would be a common belief.

        • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          14 days ago

          My kids do get a “sugar high”.

          No they absolutely do not, because that is not how human biology works. Not only are you blatantly scientifically incorrect, you’re Trump-supporter levels of smugly incorrect.

          • Dashi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            14 days ago

            I’m just about done with lemmy to because of assholes like you. Jesus christ its worse than reddit.

            All it would take is, hey not how sugar highs work you don’t actually get energy from them, what actually happens is a dopamine rush that makes people happy and happy kids tend to run around and play more.

            Took me 2 minutes of googling to find that. Did i ever say this list is bullshit? Should be burned? Has no factual basis?

            No, i just gave my experience, what i seem to have seen in my life, and question the list. I’m happy to have a conversation about it or i wouldn’t have posted.

            But you just go around insulting people and comparing them to Trump supporters. Grow up. Have a damn conversation. Stop trying to turn everything into an argument

      • yeahiknow3@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        14 days ago

        Sugar does give a little energy boost. And the rugrats will use the highly available energy

        You’re just repeating something scientifically false. Eating sugar absolutely does NOT “give you an energy boost.” What a smug advertisement of the fact that you’ve never taken a biochemistry course AND are so unobservant that you haven’t noticed sugar consumption is, if anything, more likely to make you feel drowsy than “energy boosted.”

        Fucking unbelievable. The smug wrongness of people blows my mind.

      • BakerBagel@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        My dog gets riled up when you give her a carrot as a treat. The kids aren’t bouncing off the wall because candy gave them a bunch of energy, they are bouncing off the wall because they are excited about the treat they have received.

  • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    14 days ago

    MSG = headaches is actually true for many people.

    "Effect of systemic monosodium glutamate (MSG) on headache and pericranial muscle sensitivity :

    “We conducted a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study to investigate the occurrence of adverse effects such as headache… there was a significant increase in reports of headache…” SOURCE

    In addition, if you add oil to your cooked and drained pasta, it absolutely stops it from sticking vs. not adding oil. Just don’t add it to the water, as it’s just wasteful.

      • Showroom7561@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        13 days ago

        Oh, wow. I can’t even see that sources are listed when using Voyager because if you swipe up to see it past the voting overlay, it closes the image.

        Glad they corrected it 🤗