Is This 'Monster Bullfrog' Real?
On 25 May 2017, the South Texas Hunting AssociationFacebook page posted two images of a man holding an unusually large bullfrog: Facebook  Markcuz Rangel - Wanted to share a monster bull frog we got yesterday afternoon at one of our fishing ponds in South texas ranch located in Batesville tx 13lb monster frog!!! #stxha Although theSouth Texas Hunting Association claimed that this image showed a real 13pound bullfrog, we're skeptical about the creature'ssize. For one, 13 poundsis simply too big for a frog. AdultAmerican Bullfrogs, the largest frogs in the United States, only weigh about 1.5 pounds. The largest frog in the world, the Goliath Frog, is also too small to meet the requirements of this claim. The Goliath Frog, which has a relatively small habitat range in Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea(and not South Texas), only weighs about 7 pounds. American Bullfrogs Goliath Frog In addition to its exaggerated weight,we suspect this picture makes the frog appear larger than it actually is by using forced perspective. The hunter is most likely using a gig pole to hold the frog closer to the camera. This places the frog in the foreground, making it appear much larger in comparison to the man, now standing in the background. Photographs showing people "holding up" the Leaning Tower of Pisa are good examples of forced perspective photography. The man in the following image, for instance, is not nearly as tall as the famous Italian structure: image Chron.com that the image was real, but said that forced perspective was used to to make the frog appear unusually large: Chron.com "It's not as bigly as it appears," Lightfoot said video." [sic] [It's an] optical illusion created by extending frog toward the camera -- similar to what you see with fishermen holding up fish to make them appear larger. Still a big bullfrog, though." A very similar claim, featuring a very similar photograph, which used a very similar optical trick, was circulated in November 2015. That image purportedly showing a 42-pound bullfrogwas also fake. 42-pound bullfrog  Arkansas Frogs and Toads.  "American Bullfrog."   Retrieved 26 May 2017. American Museum of Natural History.  "Goliath Frog."   Retrieved 26 May 2017. Hlavaty, Craig.  "Giant Texas Bullfrog Photo is Real... But Don't be Fooled by What You See."   Houston Chronicle.  26 May 2017.
On 5 February 2018, Shaun Usher, the owner of the blog "Letters of Note" posted an image on Twitter that purported to show Donald Trump opining that any president presiding over the United States during a stock market crash of more than 1,000 points should be "shot out of a cannon." blog image Although the image was intended to poke fun at now-President Trump's prolific Twitter use and his timeline that has offered a running joke that puts his past criticisms of his predecessor, former President Barack Obama, in context with current events (such as a precipitous stock market drop a few hours before), this tweet was not real: before   Sweet mother of god. Not for one second did I think people would believe that to be genuine.  Shaun Usher (@ShaunUsher) February 5, 2018 February 5, 2018 omg it's everywhere. What have I done.  Shaun Usher (@ShaunUsher) February 5, 2018 February 5, 2018 siri can i be arrested for making a fake tweet  Shaun Usher (@ShaunUsher) February 5, 2018 February 5, 2018 In a message sent via Twitter, Usher confirmed he was the tweet's author and that it was not real. He told us: Naively thought it too ridiculous to be believable. Says a lot, really. Was going to delete it but it was everywhere within minutes: feels like I need to leave it up in its place of birth. President Trump has legitimately tweeted about the stock market in the past, however: tweeted   Creating fake tweets is extremely easy and can spread virally within minutes  as Usher has now demonstrated, even if unintentionally. fake tweets A Democratic candidate for Utahs U.S. Senate seat claimed Republican opponent Mitt Romney is using $1 million of leftover donations to his unsuccessful presidential run to finance his Senate bid. The former Governor of Massachusetts is taking yet another short cut to the Utah Senate Seat, Nickie Titus, campaign manager for Democrat Jenny Wilson, said in apress release. Mitt certainly does things his way  moves to Utah from California (and) uses a million of his presidential campaign dollars to finance his Utah senate race. It turns out Wilsons campaign is right: Romney is using $1 million from his failed presidential bid to fuel his Senate campaign. Experts told us this is common in politics, though the practice has come under criticism. Romneys failure to reach the White House in 2008 and 2012 is not without a silver lining. It elevated Romneys public stature, gave him staying power in Republican politics and left him with a substantial  and flexible  bankroll. Campaign finance rules have long allowed a candidate to hold on to surplus campaign funds indefinitely, said Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist at the group Public Citizen, a progressive consumer rights advocacy group. Under the Federal Election Campaign Act and Federal Election Commission rules, candidates can also make unlimited transfers of funds between campaigns, Holman said. It happens all the time, said Michael J. Malbin, the executive director of the Campaign Finance Institute, a campaign finance policy think tank. House members take their bankrolls to run for the Senate, senators to run for president. As long as the money was raised for a federal office under federal contribution limits, it's okay. Holman argued just because the practice is widespread doesnt mean its fair. He said the policy can create an uneven playing field and permits candidates to use funds in a way thats contrary to donors intentions. A donor may have supported Romneys presidential campaign against the Democratic nominee, but not support Romneys new campaign for Senate in the primary or general election, Holman said. Yet, under the law, Romney has the authority to use those donors funds without getting their approval. At the beginning of 2018,Romney for President, Inc., the nonprofit organization that supported Romneys failed 2012 presidential bid, had roughly $1.3 million cash on hand. On Feb. 5, the organization transferred $1 million to Romney for Utah, Inc., according to anFEC filing. To the chagrin of Romneys opponents, the transfer from Romneys presidential campaign to his Senate run comprises donations made mostly by non-Utah residents, according to theSalt Lake Tribune. The $1 million is indicative of what were seeing from Mitt Romney. Hes bringing in national money to make this a national-profile race, Wilson told theTribune. Im a Utahn running for Utahns. The April 15, 2018, FEC filing, which covered the first three months of the year, shows the organization also made smaller disbursements for consulting work, email services and bank fees. At the end of the reporting period, Romney for President, Inc., had $222,755 cash on hand. Wilsons campaign said Romney is using a million of his presidential campaign dollars to finance his Utah senate race. The nonprofit organization that collected money for Romneys 2012 campaign transferred $1 million to Romneys bid for Utahs Senate seat. We rate this True. This typical female revenge legend, describing a woman's effective (but non-violent) way of striking back at her (former) partner, has been around since at least 1981. Legends such as these (see The $50 Porsche, for example) often feature a clever method of causing financial loss without the destruction of property: The $50 Porsche Examples: [Smith, 1986] A young couple living in the Bristol area had been having marital problems. Most of it was caused by the husband's bad temper and the fighting and constant arguing that had been going on for several months. Things finally came to a head one morning when the husband, just before he left on a three week business trip, told his wife they were finished and she had better get out of his house for good before he returned. When he arrived home his wife had gone, leaving the house in an awful mess. While he was clearing up he noticed that the telephone was off the hook. He replaced it and thought no more about it. Several weeks later the quarterly telephone bill arrived. It was astronomical  running into several thousands of pounds. He immediately queried it, only to be told that the phone had been connected to the speaking weather report in Australia for a three week period.  [Marsano, 1987] In Hollywood a man dumped his live-in girlfriend by telling her that he was off on a business trip and expected her to have cleared out of the house by the time he returned. Pretty cold, guy. The woman left, but when the man returned, he learned that she had found what Paul Simon might call the fifty-first way to leave your lover. The house was in good order, and the only thing was that the phone was off the hook. When he picked it up, he heard incomprehensible babbling, so he hung up. When his next phone bill arrived, it explained a couple of things. The strange language he had heard was Japanese, and it was giving the correct time. It had been giving the correct time enough to run up a bill of $80,000. Variations: Sightings:  An episode of the British sitcom Only Fools and Horses ("The Second Time Around," original air date 29 September 1981) features the evicted woman leaving a note announcing she's dialed the speaking clock in America.   Eskapa, Roy.  Bizarre Sex.  London: Quartet Books, 1987  ISBN 0-7043-2518-7  (pp. 82).   Fiery, Ann.  The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends  Philadelphia: Running Press Books, 2001.  ISBN 0-7624-107404  (pp. 81-86). The Complete and Totally True Book of Urban Legends   Holt, David and Bill Mooney.  Spiders in the Hairdo.  Little Rock: August House, 1999.  ISBN 0-87483-525-9  (p. 97). Spiders in the Hairdo   The Big Book of Urban Legends  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 183). The Big Book of Urban Legends Barreca, Regina.  Sweet Revenge: The Wicked Delights of Getting Even.
  New York: Harmony Books, 1995.  ISBN 0-517-59757-8  (p. 45). Sweet Revenge: The Wicked Delights of Getting Even Brunvand, Jan Harold. 
Curses! Broiled Again!
  New York: W. W. Norton, 1989.  ISBN 0-393-30711-5; (pp. 216-217). Curses! Broiled Again! Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good To Be True.
  New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.  ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (pp. 79-80). Too Good To Be True Hardy, David.  What a Mistake!
  Secaucus, NJ: Octopus Books, 1983  ISBN 1-55521-164-X  (p. 78). Marsano, William.  Man Suffocated By Potatoes.
  New York: Signet, 1987.  (pp. 149-150). Smith, Paul.  The Book of Nastier Legends.
  London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1986.  ISBN 0-7102-0573-2 &nbsp. (p. 85). The Book of Nastier Legends Claim:  If John Kerry were elected President, the Secret Service would have to protect him and every property he owns for the rest of his life. Status:  False. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004] You will pay upkeep/Secret Service for 5 Kerry mansions.  It is good to be John F. Kerry....... The F stands for Forbes in case you ever wondered. He is one of the richest Senators in Government. When someone is elected president, it means the Secret Service has to protect the President and his family as well as his property. The Kerry's have five US properties not counting the several foreign properties they own too. The cost to run these homes are more than what the average American could afford, even if the rent was free, and all you had to pay the water, gas & electric. Including ground keepers, maintenance, pool, and house keepers. To be President would require the taxpayers to pay for all that now if elected. Including a complete staffed Secret Service security 24 hours a day. In addition to that we will have to pay for each of their homes for security improvements even if they never go to them all there is that just in case. Who do you think will pay for all this? We Pay! This takes all the expense off Kerry and puts it on us. Nevertheless, factor another major cost to Americans that Kerry does not want you to know about. Becoming president would automatically include taking care of all their properties with Secret Service Agents that includes 5 agents per 6 hour shift 4 times a day 365 days of the year for the rest of their lives so long as they own those properties. It comes with being President once you are elected. It requires us the taxpayers, to pay for this as well as his annual salary as well as his retirements including the cost of living adjustments to boot.  These salaries and agents protect all their real estate property with Secret Service Agents and pay the bills for the rest of his life. In addition, feed the Secret Service Agents and rotate new ones every 6 hours for the rest of his life. Do the math. Five properties need to be protected. This requires five Secret Service Agents per shift, daily every six hours, per property! That is 20 Secret Service Agents per day per property everyday including Holidays. Wow, what does that cost? Lets say an average of 20 agents per property, each earning a about $60K per agent to survey the perimeters and protect. Now times that by five properties so far. That is if the Kerry's do not buy any more properties afterwards. This also includes the Agents vehicles and repairs, gas, meals, days off, paid vacation, and medical plan visits etc per agent. Who pays? YOU pay, the whole time they are alive after becoming President! Is this the best use of our tax money electing Kerry to take care of all their properties both foreign and domestic? On the other hand, shouldn't he pay for his own? Yet, the Presidential salary could not afford it. The more I think about paying for Kerry's properties everyday, just makes me happy keeping President Bush all the more merrier. Without raising taxes to boot. How on earth would Kerry pay for everyone to have Healthcare, increase our military, and have us pay to protect his investments, all without raising our taxes? Tax and spend Kerry is his party motto. Which really has to make you wonder why anyone with his wealth, would take a salary of that of a U.S. Senator, never mind wanna be President? Do you believe him now why he needs to be the Prez? To serve the people? On the other hand, the people serve Him and his wife! IF YOU AREN'T COMPLETELY APPALLED, THEN YOU HAVEN'T BEEN PAYING ATTENTION Origins:   The fact that Senator John Kerry's middle name is "Forbes" is about the only piece of information this latest political diatribe gets  right. John Kerry and his wife, Teresa Heinz Kerry, together own several homes, but since they signed a prenuptial agreement and have kept their premarital assets separate,  a Boston townhouse (which John Kerry mortgaged in 2003 to finance his presidential bid) is the only one of these homes that they technically own as a couple.  The government is obligated to provide Secret Service protection to the President and his immediate family, so if John Kerry were elected to that office, of course he and his family would be entitled to the same level of security detail that the Secret Service provides to every President.  That protection might indeed include the use of public funds to pay the costs of installation and maintenance for security systems at some of the Kerrys' homes, because the protection of First Families is viewed as a right and proper charge upon the nation.  Security measures of this level would not be specific to the Kerrys; the homes of all Presidents are treated this way, as (to a lesser extent) are the homes of all former Presidents.  homes It is not true, however, that every single residence owned by the either of the Kerrys (whether it be in America or abroad) would be staffed by five Secret Service agents around the clock, and that those agents would be guarding the Kerrys and all their properties for the rest of John Kerry's life.  Secret Service staffing levels vary as the situation requires, and lifetime protection for former Presidents and their spouses was eliminated by Congressional legislation in 1997.  President Clinton and his wife, Hillary, are the last First Couple who will receive such a benefit; President George W. Bush and all who succeed him in the White House will be limited to receiving Secret Service protection for a period of not more than 10 years from the time they leave office.  protection In any case, the idea that U.S. voters would have to pay higher taxes if John Kerry were elected President in order to "protect his investments" is just silly.  The projected U.S. federal budget for 2005 is $2.4 trillion  the amount of money spent to protect the President and his family (whoever that President might be) is but a teeny-tiny fraction of a drop in that vast bucket.  The only thing sillier than that notion that taxes would have to be raised to protect a putative President Kerry is the suggestion that the cost of Secret Service protection should be a factor in voters' choosing who should serve as President of the United States. budget For more information about the protection afforded former Presidents, see our article about a similar rumor that was attached to the previous First Couple when President Bill Clinton left office in 2001. article Last updated:  2 October 2004    Sources:   Burger, Timothy and Kenneth Bazinet.  "Hil and Bill Buy 3M Home, Sweet Home in Capital."   [New York] Daily News.  30 December 2000  (p. 6).     DeFrank, Thomas.  "1st Family's N.Y. Bunker."    Fuchs, Marek.  "First Family's Arrival Changes the Focus of Secret Service Office."   The New York Times.  29 October 2000  (Weekend Calendar; p. 5).     Grove, Lloyd.  "The Reliable Source."   The Washington Post.  12 January 2001  (p. C3). Donald Trump Jr.claimedin a widespread tweet that former Vice President Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. The eldest son of President Donald Trump wasrepeatingarefrainfrom the Republican National Convention, where Republican National Committee ChairRonna McDanielandEric Trumpmade similar claims. But the claim is misleading. Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. Biden, the Democratic nominee for president, has pledged not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $400,000 per year,aswevereported. Independent tax analysts have found that his plan does not call for direct tax increases on anyone below that threshold. Tax analysts say the indirect effects of Bidens proposal to raise the corporate tax rate could mean slightly lower after-tax incomes for some lower earners. By one analysis, about 82% of Americans would feel these effects  though for many, the hit would be small. But thatdoesnt mean82% of Americans will have higher tax rates or owe more to the Internal Revenue Service, as the phrase raise taxes suggests. To the extent that the Trump campaign is using this figure to imply that individual income and payroll taxes will rise for 82% of Americans, the claim is misleading, said John Ricco, a senior analyst at the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which is the basis for the 82% figure. Bidens tax plan aims to raise up to $4 trillion in revenues over a decade, according to theTax Policy Center. It would do so in part byrolling backsome of the tax cuts for corporations and people with taxable incomes over $400,000 that Trump signed into law in 2017. Among Bidens proposed changes, he would: Increase the top corporate tax rate from 21% to 28%. Raise the top federal marginal income tax rate for individuals to 39.6%. Place a 12.4% Social Security payroll tax on incomes above $400,000. Tax capital gains at the same rate as ordinary income for very high earners. Other independent groups have also examined Bidens tax plan, including theTax Foundation, thePenn Wharton Budget Model, theAmerican Enterprise Instituteand theCommittee for a Responsible Federal Budget. The groups havegenerally agreedthat Bidens plan largely targets corporations and the nations biggest earners. The Tax Policy Center, for example,estimatedthat more than 90% of the tax increases from Bidens plan would be borne by the top 20% of earners. No direct taxes are imposed on any household making less than $400,000 per year, the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budgetwrotein its analysis. Garrett Watson, a senior policy analyst at the Tax Foundation, said there aresome specific scenarioswhere Bidens proposals related to itemized deductions, retirement benefits and payroll taxes could result in potential direct tax hikes for some households under $400,000. For example, in a scenario where one spouse makes more than $400,000 but the other incurs a loss that brings the adjusted gross income for their two-income household below $400,000, they could be hit by the Biden payroll tax, Watson said. In interviews, economic advisers to the Biden campaign said any final tax law would have mechanisms written in to prevent anybody making less than $400,000 from being inadvertently affected. Its not hard to have a hold harmless provision to deal with any oddball cases that seem unlikely to even ever arise, said Gene Sperling, a campaign adviser who was director of the National Economic Council under Presidents Barack Obama and Bill Clinton. The groups that examined Bidens tax plan also estimated that over time, some of the burden of Bidens tax increases would fall to people making less than $400,000 in the form of lower wages or investment returns  indirect effects of the proposed corporate tax rate increase. These effects would berelatively small, and tax analysts say they make up the bulk of the hits dealt to lower earners under Bidens tax plan. But they form the basis for Donald Trump Jr.s claim that 82% of Americans would see their taxes raised. A Trump campaign spokesperson argued that the impact of the corporate tax rate increase is effectively a tax increase on individuals. The Biden campaign, on the other hand, said the two are not equal. Nobody filling out their 1040 is going to see a tax increase, and nobody would consider that type of economic impact as a tax increase, even if it happened, said Sperling. (AP Photo) According to theTax Policy Center, the lowest 20% of earners would see their 2021 incomes drop by an average of $30 under Biden; the next would see an average loss of $110; the middle would see an average drop of $260; and the second-highest would see an average loss of $590. ThePenn Wharton Budget Modelprojects smaller average declines for 2021: $15 for the bottom 20%; $90 for the second quintile; $180 for the third quintile; and $360 for the fourth quintile. Trump Jr.s 82% figure comes from the Penn Wharton Budget Model, which estimated what share of each income group would experience a tax change as a result of Bidens proposals. A little math gets to 82% of people affected. But the concept of indirect effects is distinct from how most normal people think about taxes, said Ricco, the Penn Wharton analyst. Only families with adjusted gross incomes of more than $400,000 would be sending a larger check to the IRS, or having more federal taxes withheld from their paychecks, Ricco said. Those taxpayers were between the top 1% and 2% of filers in 2017, said Watson, the Tax Foundation analyst, citing the IRS. The Penn Wharton Budget Model also shows how Bidens tax plan would affect Americans if the indirect effects of the corporate tax are excluded. With the corporate tax plan removed from the analysis, the average tax change drops to zero for the bottom 90% of earners. We expect that between 1% and 2% of American families would see increases in individual income and payroll taxes, Ricco said. There are other aspects of Bidens plans that arent reflected in independent tax analyses. The Trump campaign, for example, said Bidens plan to reinstate the penalty for not complying with the Affordable Care Actsindividual mandateshould be thought of as a tax  which is in line with theSupreme Courts reasoningwhen it upheld the mandate in 2012. The Biden campaign said its a fee, pointing to the Health and Human Services Departmentslanguage. Economic advisers to the Biden campaign, meanwhile, said the tax analysesdont account forBidens proposed tax credits and spending programs aimed at middle-class and lower earners. Those and other Biden proposals will substantially boost middle-class incomes for families across the country, said Biden campaign spokesperson Andrew Bates. Gordon Mermin, a senior research associate at the Tax Policy Center, said Biden has proposed many tax credits, including recent proposals for a refundable child- and dependent-care tax credit, a refundable tax credit for first-time homebuyers, and a low-income renters credit. If the Penn Wharton Budget Model factored in Bidens tax credits  and it did not  then the 82% figure representing the percent of Americans who would experience changes to their after-tax incomes would be substantially lower, Mermin said. Ricco said the Penn Wharton analysis focused only on revenue-raising provisions. Donald Trump Jr. said, Joe Biden wants to raise taxes on 82% of all Americans. Trump inaccurately described an analysis from the Penn Wharton Budget Model. The 82% is a calculation made using the models estimates that represents the percentage of people whose after-tax incomes would change under Bidens plan. But theres a difference between a tax increase and the share of corporate tax increases borne by individual taxpayers in the form or lower investment returns or incomes. Biden has pledged not to directly raise taxes on people earning less than $400,000 per year. Some Biden tax credits not included in Penn Wharton analysis could potentially offset some of the indirect hits posed to lower earners as a result of Bidens proposed corporate tax hike. We rate this statement False. Ball-Point Pens for the Astronauts When NASA started sending astronauts into space, they quicklyDiscovered that ball-point pens would not work in zeroGravity. To combat this problem, NASA scientists spent aDecade and $12 billion developing a pen that writes in zeroGravity, upside-down, on almost any surface including glassAnd at temperatures ranging from below freezing to over 300 C. The Russians used a pencil. Your taxes are due again  enjoy paying them. [The Moscow Times, 2000] There is a charming anecdote that roams from e-mail box to e-mail box around the world about how, at the height of the space race, the Americans and Soviets approached the same problem: how an astronaut (or cosmonaut) could use a pen to write in zero gravity. As the story goes, the Americans spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on an ambitious, gravity-immune ballpoint pen; they successfully developed such a pen; and this pen went on to become a massive commercial success in the private sector. The Soviets  with the simple elegance their scientists are so rightly famed for  opted instead to use a pencil. Thelesson of the infamous "space pen" anecdote related above, about NASA's spending a small fortune to develop a ballpoint pen that astronauts could use in outer space while completely overlooking the simple and elegant solution adopted by the Soviet space program (give cosmonauts pencils instead), is a valid one: sometimes we expend a great deal of time, effort, and money to create a "high-tech" solution to a problem, when a perfectly good, cheap, and simple answer is right before our eyes. As good a story and moral as that may be, however, this anecdote doesn't offer a real-life example of that syndrome. Both U.S. astronauts and Soviet cosmonauts initially used pencils on space flights, but those writing instruments were not ideal: pencil tips can flake and break off, and having such objects floating around space capsules in near-zero gravity posed a potential harm to astronauts and equipment. (As well, after the fatal Apollo 1 fire in 1967, NASA was anxious to avoid having astronauts carry flammable objects such as pencils onboard with them.) When the solution of providing astronauts with a ballpoint pen that would work under weightless conditions and extreme temperatures came about, though, it wasn't because NASA had thrown hundreds of thousands of dollars (inflated to $12 billion in the latest iterations of this tale) in research and development money at the problem. The "space pen" that has since become famous through its use by astronauts was developed independently by Paul C. Fisher of the Fisher Pen Co., who spent his own money on the project and, once he perfected his AG-7 "Anti-Gravity" Space Pen, offered it to NASA. After that agency tested and approved the pen's suitability for use in space flights, they purchased a number of the instruments from Fisher for a modest price. This is how Fisher themselves described the development of their Space Pen: NASA never asked Paul C. Fisher to produce a pen. When the astronauts began to fly, like the Russians, they used pencils, but the leads sometimes broke and became a hazard by floating in the [capsule's] atmosphere where there was no gravity. They could float into an eye or nose or cause a short in an electrical device. In addition, both the lead and the wood of the pencil could burn rapidly in the pure oxygen atmosphere. Paul Fisher realized the astronauts needed asafer and more dependable writing instrument, so in July 1965 he developed the pressurized ball pen, with its ink enclosed in a sealed, pressurized ink cartridge. Fisher sent the first samples to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Director of the Houston Space Center. The pens were all metal except for the ink, which had a flash point above 200C. The sample Space Pens were thoroughly tested by NASA. They passed all the tests and have been used ever since on all manned space flights, American and Russian. All research and development costs were paid by Paul Fisher. No development costs have ever been charged to the government. Because of the fire in Apollo 1, in which three Astronauts died, NASA required a writing instrument that would not burn in a 100% oxygen atmosphere. It also had to work in the extreme conditions of outer space: (NASA tested the pressurized Space Pens at -50C, but because of the residential [sic] heat in the pen it also writes for many minutes in the cold shadows.) Fisher spent over one million dollars in trying to perfect the ball point pen before he made his first successful pressurized pens in 1965. Samples were immediately sent to Dr. Robert Gilruth, Manager of the Houston Space Center, where they were thoroughly tested and approved for use in Space in September 1965. In December 1967 he sold 400 Fisher Space Pens to NASA for $2.95 each. Lead pencils were used on all Mercury and Gemini space flights and all Russian space flights prior to 1968. Fisher Space Pens are more dependable than lead pencils and cannot create the hazard of a broken piece of lead floating through the gravity-less atmosphere. Paul Fisher continues to market his space pens as the writing instrument that went to the moon and has spun off this effort into a separate corporation, the Fisher Space Pen Co.: Space Pen   Sightings:  This legend was referenced in an episode of NBC's The West Wing TV series ("We Killed Yamamoto"; original air date 15 May 2002): https://youtu.be/LQy1DH38E5g Curtin, Ciara.   "NASA Spent Millions to Develop a Pen That Would Write in Space."  
 Scientific American.   20 December 2008. Garber, Steve.  "The Fisher Space Pen."  
 NASA.gov. The Moscow Times.  "Pencil Us in for the Next Y2K Disaster." 
 14 January 2000. New Jersey doesnt just need a lot of federal aid to rebuild a coastline ravaged by Hurricane Sandy, the state also deserves it, according to Gov. Chris Christie.NBC Nightly News host Brian Williams asked Christie recently if its fair for people who have no interests in the Jersey Shore to ask, Why the money? Why the effort, if this is the new normal?Well, listen, it's fair to ask it but I have the answer, Christie said during the Oct. 30 interview. The answer is that for New Jersey, which gives so much to this country -- by the way, 50th in return of our federal tax dollars. So New Jerseyans send more than any other state in America in federal taxes, getting back less. When that's done and you see that our state is a state that needs this to contribute to our economy and also to the soul and the vibrancy of our state, I think we have very good answers and arguments to make. And you count on one thing: you're looking at the guy who is going to make those arguments.With Christie building part of his case for federal assistance around the states return on federal tax dollars, PolitiFact New Jersey wondered whether his premise is true.Add Donor State to the list of New Jerseys monikers.Depending on the year -- and whether adjustments are made to federal data -- New Jersey ranks at or near the bottom nationwide in this category.The Tax Foundation, a business-backed group, tracked how much the federal government collected through taxes and returned through expenditures to states every year from 1981 to 2005.The Washington, D.C.-based foundation calculated the federal tax burden -- a measurement meant to account for taxes that are assessed in one state, but impact taxpayers elsewhere -- to conduct its analysis.In 17 of those 25 years, New Jersey came in last place, receiving 70 cents or less for every dollar it sent to the federal government.In 2005 -- the most recent year analyzed by the Tax Foundation -- the federal government gave New Jersey 61 cents for every dollar it took. That was the smallest return of any state.But that was seven years ago. Though the Tax Foundation hasnt updated its findings, other studies show New Jersey still ranks near the bottom.The Northeast-Midwest Institute, a research organization based in Washington, D.C., that promotes 18 states in the region, released a May 2011 report on federal spending and taxation patterns that focused on New Jersey.New Jersey ranked 48th in the nation. Only Minnesota and Delaware received smaller returns on their federal tax dollars in 2009, according to the report, which relied on raw, unadjusted data.PolitiFact New Jerseys analysis of federal data from 2010 also put New Jersey in 48th place. So even the raw data put New Jersey near the bottom in this category.But Colleen Cain, a senior policy analyst with the Northeast-Midwest Institute who prepared the 2011 report, said in an e-mail, that the news behind this is not all bad.In the report, Cain attributes the low ranking to New Jerseys relatively high income levels and greater-than-average business income tax contribution, coupled with a relatively low need for federal aid.It does, however, underscore the importance of states like New Jersey in supporting the fiscal health of the nation generally.Our rulingChristie said that New Jersey is 50th in return of our federal tax dollars.The Tax Foundations analysis of 2005 data, which was adjusted to reflect each states overall federal tax burden, ranked New Jersey 50th in the nation in this category.The state received 61 cents for every dollar it sent to Washington, D.C. that year.Though that research is outdated, more recent analysis of raw data shows New Jersey still ranks near the bottom.On the Truth-O-Meter, Christies statement registers as Mostly True. To comment on this ruling, go toNJ.com. Since at least 2008, a troubling image of a turtle with a drastically deformed shell has been circulating online, with multiple web sites employing it to illustrate posts about the dangers of plastic pollution in the oceans. The image shows a brown-colored turtle with a shell constricted in the middle, giving her a figure-eight shape: circulating  This image captures a snapping turtle named Mae West who currently resides at the STAR Eco Station in Los Angeles, California, where she is in good health. A representative from the station, which operates a wildlife rescue and environmental science museum, told us Mae West was rescuednearly two decades ago after she was discovered with a plastic milk jug ring around her midsection, although though it was unclear exactly how long the ring had been in place: In 2000, she was discovered in Louisiana with a plastic milk jug ring around the width of her shell. In addition to having an extremely narrow midsection, she was also found to be carrying several eggs at the time. The handler in Louisiana decided that she was no longer able to care for her and arranged to haveMaeplaced at the Eco Station. Some of the blogsposting this image in early 2017 incorrectly claimed the turtle had been caught in a rubber band from an early age, causing her to grow abnormally. Mae West was brought to her current home after being cared for by an anti-pollution non-profit called The 5 Gyers Institute, also based in Los Angeles. The image shown above was used in a 2009 Earth Day report by Oprah Winfrey discussing the effects of plastic pollution on marine life: used Sadly, the type of deformity afflicting Mae West isn't unique. Another famous turtle is living with a similar human-caused deformity: Peanut, a red-eared slider turtle who was rescued and nursed to health after being discovered entrapped in a plastic six-pack ring, has often been misidentified as Mae West (and vice-versa) in photographs. Peanut Peanut was found in Missouri in 1993 and taken to a zoo, where the plastic ring was removed from his midsection. The turtle (who was for years mistakenly believed to be female) is currently under the care of the Missouri Department of Conservation. Photographs provided by the department show he does indeed resemble a peanut:   Despite his deformation, Peanut has also managed to live a long and healthy life and is now believed to be a senior terrapin at 32 or 33 years old, said Dan Zarlenga, spokesman for the Missouri Department of Conservation. Had he not been found and cared for by humans, Peanut probably would not have survived for long in the wild. Eriksen, Marcus."Meet the Famous Turtle With a Serious Plastic Problem."
Planet Experts.6 July 2015. Missouri Department of Conservation."The Story of Peanut the Turtle." Monks, Kieron. "The Plastic Plague: Can Our Oceans Be Saved From Environmental Ruin?
CNN.2 September 2016. Moore, Charles."Choking the Oceans With Plastic."
The New York Times.25 August 2015. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos has been the subject of intense scrutiny since even before her appointment, both about her qualifications and positions on education policy and also about her (and her family's) financial connections, investments, and donations. qualifications connections donations That scrutiny continued in August 2018, when the investigative web site Capital & Main published a report detailing the registration and management of a yacht associated with the DeVos family: report When someone untied a yacht owned by U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVoss family, Fox News portrayed the episode as an illustration of uncouth anti-Trump sentiment. The yachts foreign flag, though, was an illustration of how an allegedly America First administration is chock-full of moguls who have eagerly stashed their wealth offshore -- as long as doing so means avoiding taxes, regulations, transparency requirements and domestic employment laws. ... When her familys 164-foot yacht was untied from a Huron, Ohio dock, it was flying a flag of the Cayman Islands, where VesselTracker says the yacht is registered. According to federal records, the yacht is owned by RDV International Marine, which is an affiliate of the company that controls the DeVos familys fortune. ... When buying a vessel or cruising in U.S. waters, American yacht owners like the DeVoses could face state sales or use taxes. However, registering a yacht in a locale like the Caymans  under what has come to be known as a flag of convenience  allows those American yacht owners to effectively characterize themselves as foreigners for tax purposes, thereby avoiding the obligation of paying the standard sales and use levies, while enjoying police and Coast Guard services during times their vessels are untied. The report, which was also published by Newsweek, prompted several memes from left-wing and progressive social media accounts, such as the following Occupy Democrats post: Newsweek Occupy Democrats   "The Other 98%" posted a similar meme of their own: meme   On Facebook, the progressive "Americans for Tax Fairness" coalition posted a meme which claimed that the Cayman Islands registration applied to all the yachts owned by the DeVos family: meme   The yacht in question, Seaquest, is registered in the Cayman Islands, an arrangement that has potentially allowed its owner(s) to avoid paying taxes that they would otherwise face when travelling in the United States. However, it cannot be affirmed with certainty that this was the motivation behind the overseas registration. Furthermore, Betsy DeVos is not the owner of the vessel (although members of her family are), and a spokesperson for the DeVos family's main management company told us that neither she nor her husband Dick was responsible for the decision to register the yacht in the Cayman Islands. The yacht Seaquest is a 164-foot long (50-meter) yacht built by Westport and registered in George Town, the capital of the Cayman Islands. It is owned and managed by R.D.V. International Marine, according to the web site VesselTracker.com. The country's Shipping Registry confirmed to us that Seaquest's official Cayman Island's vessel number is 740641. VesselTracker.com R.D.V. International Marine is an entity of R.D.V. Corporation, the Michigan-registered management company which oversees the substantial financial investments and business interests of the DeVos family, headed by 92-year-old Richard DeVos, a multi-billionaire businessman and one of the co-founders of the "multi-level marketing" giant Amway. registered Dick DeVos (Richard DeVos Jr.), the husband of Betsy DeVos, is a director of R.D.V. Corporation, as is the couple's daughter Elisabeth ("Elissa") Lowery, Dick's sister Suzanne ("Cheri") DeVos, and his brothers Doug and Dan and their wives Maria and Pamella. Betsy DeVos was herself a company director until November 2016, according to her financial disclosure. director disclosure However, Chief Operating Officer of the Windquest Group, Greg McNeilly, told us that Dick and Betsy DeVos are not the owners of Seaquest. (The Windquest Group is a private investment firm founded by Dick DeVos, who is its president. Betsy DeVos was a director at Windquest until November 2016.) This was corroborated by Nick Wasmiller, a spokesperson for R.D.V. Corporation, who told us by email that Seaquest is owned (through R.D.V. International Marine) by Richard DeVos, who previously owned it in conjunction with his wife Helen prior to her death in October 2017: "Dick and Betsy DeVos do not own Seaquest and have never held ownership in the watercraft ... Dick and Betsy DeVos had no role in the registration of Seaquest nor the management of any subsequent efforts to maintain that registration." So the three memes referenced above (from Occupy Democrats, the Other 98% and Americans for Tax Fairness) are factually inaccurate in alleging that Betsy DeVos both owns Seaquest and registered it in the Cayman Islands, or that she registered "her family's fleet of 10 yachts" in the Cayman Islands. The yacht Seaquest is, and has always been, owned by Betsy DeVos' father-in-law, according to spokespersons for two DeVos family companies, and Betsy herself has never made any management or registration decisions about it, according to a spokesperson for R.D.V. Corporation. A 2017 investigation by the Wall Street Journal outlined how the extended DeVos family structures and manages their investments, business interests, and assets, which include nine vessels other than Seaquest: Blue Sky, Quantum Racing, Delta Victor, Reflection, Attitude, Sterling, Windquest, Zorro, and De Lus. investigation In response to our question, Wasmiller confirmed that these other nine vessels are "owned by various DeVos family entities" but said they are "registered in the United States." We checked the U.S. Coast Guard's Vessel Documentation Center database, and found that the nine DeVos family-related vessels listed by the Wall Street Journal are indeed all registered to ports in the United States, specifically in Michigan, Delaware, and Florida. database So the Americans for Tax Fairness meme is also false on the grounds that it claims Betsy DeVos registered "her family's fleet of 10 yachts in the Cayman Islands," but in reality nine of those vessels are registered in the United States, and the one that is registered in the Cayman Islands is not managed or owned by Betsy DeVos. Use tax While Betsy DeVos does not personally own or manage Seaquest, it is possible that its registration in the Cayman Islands, as opposed to the United States, might have allowed its owner, Richard DeVos (via RDV International Marine) to avoid incurring certain taxes (though this is not certain), as Capital & Main reported: reported If the vessel were registered in, say, Grand Rapids, Michigan  the state where RDV is located and that has in the past made an effort to compel yacht owners to pay use taxes  the SeaQuest would likely be subject to Michigans six percent use tax. That would require the DeVos empire to cough up about $2.4 million ... The figure of $2.4 million represents six percent of $40 million, which is the estimated value given to Seaquest in several news reports, including Capital & Main's investigation. The source of that evaluation is not clear, with many articles describing the yacht as being "reportedly valued at $40 million," without providing any attribution for that number. We found one online broker selling a brand-new 164-foot Westport yacht (like Seaquest) for $42.5 million, and another 2013 listing for a similar vessel which presented a sale price of $34 million. Seaquest was built in 2008, so it's possible its purchase price was lower than $40 million.  yacht listing Furthermore, it's unclear whether Seaquest would actually incur a tax liability even if it were registered in Michigan.  What's in question here is a type of taxation called "use tax," which applies to tangible products and entities that are brought into and used or consumed in a particular jurisdiction (in this case the state of Michigan), in circumstances where sales tax does not apply. Section 205.93 of Michigan's Compiled Laws states that: states There is levied upon and there shall be collected from every person in this state a specific tax, including both the local community stabilization share and the state share, for the privilege of using, storing, or consuming tangible personal property in this state at a total combined rate equal to 6% of the price of the property or services ... So, in principle at least, if you own a yacht that is habitually docked or sailed in Michigan, that is likely to be regarded as storage or usage, and you would owe the state of Michigan use tax of six percent of the price of the yacht. However, certain exemptions from this use tax exist when the property is purchased outside Michigan, is "used solely for personal, nonbusiness purposes," and "the property is purchased by a person who is not a resident of this state at the time of purchase and is brought into this state more than 90 days after the date of purchase" or "the property is purchased by a person who is a resident of this state at the time of purchase and is brought into this state more than 360 days after the date of purchase." We don't know whether Richard DeVos was a resident of Michigan at the time he bought Seaquest in 2008, and we don't know how much time elapsed between his purchase of the yacht and its arrival in the state. Therefore, even if Seaquest were registered in Michigan and not the Cayman Islands, it's not certain that vessel would be subject to use tax, although this is certainly a possibility. Wasmiller, on behalf of R.D.V. Corporation, provided an alternative explanation for the decision to register Seaquest in the Cayman Islands: Non-commercial watercraft exceeding 100 feet, such as Seaquest, are commonly registered in the Cayman Islands. The countrys strict safety, manning and operation standards for non-commercial watercraft are widely recognized in international waters and closely align with requirements commonly encountered during global travel. As a result, registration in the Cayman Islands provides for the most efficient entrance and exit of various jurisdictions. In boating terms, its a widely recognized flag -- a significant benefit when traveling internationally, thus the registration of Seaquest there. Also of note, it is the policy of RDV International Marine that all employees aboard Seaquest are eligible to work in the United States, as the boat does periodically enter U.S. waterways. Conclusion The claims contained in the viral memes we listed are based on several assumptions, made without sufficient evidence, and contradicted by spokespersons for Dick and Betsy DeVos and Richard DeVos. First, RDV International Marine owns Seaquest, and RDV International Marine is an entity of RDV Corporation, the DeVos "family office" which oversees the family's substantial business interests, assets and investments. However, even though Betsy DeVos is a former director of RDV Corporation, and her family members are closely intertwined with the company, this does not mean that every asset owned by every entity of RDV Corporation is also owned (even in part) by every member of the DeVos family. It is a family company, but it is not a co-op. This logical and evidentiary leap is also directly contradicted by spokespersons for two DeVos-related companies, who stated on the record that Richard DeVos owns Seaquest, and that neither Betsy nor Dick DeVos have ever owned even part of it nor have ever made decisions about its management and registration. Second, there is a significant evidentiary leap from the fact that one DeVos-related yacht is registered in the Cayman Islands to the claim that 10 DeVos-related vessels are registered there. This is factually inaccurate. Nine of the vessels listed as DeVos assets in a Wall Street Journal article are registered in the United States. And finally, there is an assumption (albeit a more reasonable one) involved in the claim that registering Seaquest in the Cayman Islands allows its owner(s) to avoid paying taxes in the United States. Michigan state law allows for certain exemptions from the obligation to pay "use tax," and it cannot be said with certainty that Richard DeVos, the owner of Seaquest, did not meet the criteria for those exemptions. The claim that the tax obligation allegedly being avoided amounts to $2.4 million is also based on an assumption about the price of the yacht itself, which is not known for certain. Emery, David. "Meet Betsy DeVos, Trump's Secretary of Education Nominee."
  Snopes.com.  26 November 2016. Kasprak, Alex.  "Dubious Conspiracy Theory Links Putin's Daughter to Russia-Trump Collusion."
  Snopes.com.  24 July 2018. MacGuill, Dan.  "Christian Non-Profit Faces Scrutiny Over Government Foster Care Contract for Separated Children."
  Snopes.com.  11 July 2018. Sirota, David.  "Forget Old Glory -- Why Betsy DeVos's Family Yacht and Others Fly Foreign Flags."
  Capital & Main.  7 August 2018. DeVos, Elisabeth P.  "Executive Branch Personnel, Public Financial Disclosure Report."
  U.S. Office of Government Ethics.  19 January 2017. Das, Anupreeta, and Jean Eaglesham.  "Look Inside the DeVos Family Office."
  The Wall Street Journal.  8 November 2017. Michigan Compiled Laws.  "Section 205.93 -- Use Tax Act."
  Michigan Legislature.  Accessed 17 August 2018. In March 2020, some social media users encountered an open letter that was supposedly written by Mtley Cre musician Tommy Lee to U.S. President Donald Trump, which started "Dear fucking lunatic."   Lee did not write this letter. The Mtley Cre musician posted the letter to his Facebook page (which is likely why some people mistakenly assumed he had written it) on March 20, 2020, and attributed the letter to a man by the name of Craig Alan Wilkins.  But "Craig Alan Wilkins" didn't write this letter, either. The majority of text in this letter  most everything except for the intro starting with "Do you know how fucking insane you sound, you off-brand butt plug?"  was published on the Daily Kos in December 2017 in an article by "Aldous J Pennyfarthing." Daily Kos Pennyfarthing's letter was written in response to an interview Trump gave to The New York Times in 2017, in which he said, "Yeah, China.  Chinas been.  I like very much President Xi. He treated me better than anybodys ever been treated in the history of China." The New York Times Pennyfarthing's original letter started: Dear Fucking Lunatic, I read with interest your recent interview with The New York Times. I couldnt get past the bit about your being the most popular visitor in the history of fucking China  a country thats only 2,238 years old, give or take. It's unclear who amended the opening paragraph in this letter. It's possible that a Facebook user named "Craig Alan Wilkins" shared Pennyfarthing's open letter with a new introductory paragraph. While the author of the opening paragraph is still uncertain, the majority of this text was written by Aldous J Pennyfarthing, the pen name for author Tom Breuer, and was originally published on the Daily Kos in 2017. This open letter was subsequently published in Pennyfarthing's 2018 book Dear F*cking Lunatic: 101 Obscenely Rude Letters to Donald Trump.  Tom Breuer Dear F*cking Lunatic: 101 Obscenely Rude Letters to Donald Trump Pennyfarthing, Aldous.  "Dear F*cking Lunatic: 101 Obscenely Rude Letters to Donald Trump."
  Aldous J. Pennyfarthing.  1 April 2018. Pennyfarthing, Aldous.  "Dear F*cking Lunatic: An open letter to Donald Trump."
  Daily Kos.  29 December 2017. The New York Times.  "Excerpts From Trumps Interview With The Times." 
 28 December 2017.