Are These the Final Words of the Challenger Crew?
Seventy-three seconds into the 28 January 1986 flight of the space shuttle Challenger the craft broke apart, killing the seven astronauts aboard. Videotapes released by NASA afterwards showed that a few seconds before the disaster, an unusual plume of fire and smoke could be seen spewing from the lower section of the shuttle's right solid-fuel rocket. It was generally assumed (and NASA did little to disturb this opinion) that all aboard died the moment the external tank blew up. NASA later conceded it was likely that at least three of the crew members aboard remained conscious after the explosion, and perhaps even throughout the few minutes it took forthe crew compartment of the shuttle to fall back to Earth and slam into the Atlantic Ocean. The agency was highly secretive about matters relating to the Challenger tragedy, actively fighting in the courts media requests to be allowed access to photographs of the wreckage, the details of the settlements made with the crews' families, or the autopsy reports, and this reticence to share information likely convinced some that there was more to the story than was being told. Such an environment breeds its own rumors, and Miami Herald reporter Dennis E. Powell wrote that the crew were likely all alive and conscious until the shuttle's crew compartment plunged into the Atlantic Ocean: When the shuttle broke apart, the crew compartment did not lose pressure, at least not at once. There was an uncomfortable jolt  "A pretty good kick in the pants" is the way one investigator describes it  but it was not so severe as to cause injury. This probably accounted for the "uh oh" that was the last word heard on the flight deck tape recorder that would be recovered from the ocean floor two months later. As they were feeling the jolt, the four astronauts on the flight deck saw a bright flash and a cloud of steam. The lights went out. The intercom went dead. After a few breaths, the seven astronauts stopped getting oxygen into their helmets. Someone, apparently astronaut Ronald McNair, leaned forward and turned on the personal emergency air pack of shuttle pilot Michael Smith. The PEAP of Commander Francis Scobee was in a place where it was difficult to reach. It was not activated. Even so, if the crew compartment did not rapidly lose air pressure, Scobee would only have had to lift his mask to be able to breathe. Two other PEAPs were turned on. The three others were never found. Though the shuttle had broken to pieces, the crew compartment was intact. It stabilized in a nose-down attitude within 10 to 20 seconds, say the investigators. Even if the compartment was gradually losing pressure, those on the flight deck would certainly have remained conscious long enough to catch a glimpse of the green-brown Atlantic rushing toward them. If it lost its pressurization very slowly or remained intact until it hit the water, they were conscious and cognizant all the way down. In fact, no clear evidence was ever found that the crew cabin depressurized at all. There was certainly no sudden, catastrophic loss of air of the type that would have knocked the astronauts out within seconds. Such an event would have caused the mid-deck floor to buckle upward; that simply didn't happen. A purported transcript of the Challenger crew's final horrifying moments has circulated online for many years, supposedly taken from a "secret tape" leaked from NASA: A secret NASA tape reveals that the crew of the shuttle Challenger not only survived the explosion that ripped the vessel apart; they screamed, cried, cursed and prayed for three hellish minutes before they slammed into the Atlantic and perished on January 28, 1986. The tape is said to begin with a startled crewman screaming,"What happened? What happened? Oh God - No!" Screams and curses are heard - several crewmen begin to weep - and then others bid their families farewell. Two minutes forty-five seconds later the tape ends. That's when the shuttles crew compartment, which remained intact after the vessel exploded over the Atlantic, hit the ocean at over 2,000 miles per hour, instantly killing the crew. "Cover up? Of course there was a coverup," declared Robert Hotz, a member of the Presidential commission that investigated the disaster. "NASA can't face the fact that they put these astronauts in a situation where they didn't have adequate equipment to survive. NASA doesn't give a damn about anything but covering it's ass," he said. The official account released by NASA ends with shuttle pilot Michael Smith saying, "Uh-oh!" Some NASA employees have evidently heard more - much more. And they provided the rest of the account based on what they've discussed within NASA in the last five years. The astronauts had time and realized something was happening after the shuttle broke up. "All shuttle astronauts carry personal recorders and the tape in question apparently came from Christa's (McAuliffe), which was recovered after the shuttle disaster," said Hotz. Jarvis was sitting beside her, and when he figured out what was happening he said, "Give me your hand." "NASA insists there's nothing like that on tape but they're talking about the mission tape, not Christa's. So they're not lying, but they're not telling the truth, either." A journalist with close ties to NASA was even more emphatic, "There are persistent rumors, dating back to the disaster, that this tape is absolutely bone-chilling." The following transcript begins two seconds after NASA's official version ends, with pilot Michael Smith saying, "Uh-oh!" Times from the moment of takeoff are shown in minutes and seconds and are approximate. The sex of the speaker is indicated by M or F. T+1:15  (M)  What happened? What happened? Oh God, no - no! T+1:17  (F)  Oh dear God. T+1:18  (M)  Turn on your air pack! Turn on your air... T+1:20  (M)  Can't breathe... choking... T+1:21  (M)  Lift up your visor! T+1:22  (M/F)  (Screams.) It's hot. (Sobs.) I can't. Don't tell me... God! Do it...now... T+1:24  (M)  I told them... I told them... Dammit! Resnik don't... T+1:27  (M)  Take it easy! Move (unintelligible)... T+1:28  (F)  Don't let me die like this. Not now. Not here... T+1:31  (M)  Your arm... no... I (extended garble, static) T+1:36  (F)  I'm... passing... out... T+1:37  (M)  We're not dead yet. T+1:40  (M)  If you ever wanted (unintelligible) me a miracle... (unintelligible)... (screams) T+1:41  (M)  She's... she's... (garble) ... damn! T+1:50  (M)  Can't breathe... T+1:51  (M/F)  (screams) Jesus Christ! No! T+1:54  (M)  She's out. T+1:55  (M)  Lucky... (unintelligible). T+1:56  (M)  God. The water... we're dead! (screams) T+2:00  (F)  Goodbye (sobs)... I love you, I love you... T+2:03  (M)  Loosen up... loosen up... T+2:07  (M)  It'll just be like a ditch landing... T+2:09  (M)  That's right, think positive. T+2:11  (M)  Ditch procedure... T+2:14  (M)  No way! T+2:17  (M)  Give me your hand... T+2:19  (M)  You awake in there? I... I... T+2:29  (M)  Our Father... (unintelligible)... T+2:42  (M)  ...hallowed be Thy name... (unintelligible). T+2:57  (M)  You...over there? T+2:58  (M)  The Lord is my shepherd, I shall... not want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures... though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil... I will dwell in the house... T+3:15 to end.  None. Static, silence. Rest in Peace However, this "transcript" originated with an article published in a February 1991 issue of Weekly World News, a tabloid famous for creating news stories out of whole cloth. There never was such a transcript, nor was the crew of the Challenger known to have been wearing personal recorders. Moreover, personal recorders would not have picked up the comments of crew members on different decks as the faked transcript would have us believe. Weekly World News Not everyone aboard died the exact second the external tank exploded; that much is known. A complete understanding of exactly what happened in that cabin after the explosion remains elusive because the impact of the crash, plus the six weeks the wreckage and bodies spent in the sea, made it impossible to determine precisely when and how everybody aboard died. (Six weeks in sea water would also have ruined any unshielded audio tapes that miraculously survived the explosion and the crash.)  If the cabin depressurized immediately, the crew would have lived about 6 to 15 seconds after the blast; if not, they might have survived for the full two minutes and forty-five seconds it took the cabin to fall 65,000 feet back to Earth. They most certainly could not have lived through the crushing 207 mph impact with the waters off the Florida coast, which negates the wilder versions of "survived astronauts" rumors that had them still alive for hours (and even days) under the sea, waiting for rescuers who could not reach them in time. Possibly the best clue towards solving the mystery of how long the doomed crew survived lies in what NASA learned from examining the four emergency air packs recovered from the wreckage. Three had been manually activated, which demonstrated that at least some of the crew realized something had gone wrong and had taken steps to save themselves. However, the fourth unactivated pack speaks with an even stronger voice, indicating that most likely realization of the circumstances and loss of consciousness were occurring at roughly the same time. That was the conclusion of Dr. Joseph Kerwin, director of Life Sciences at the Johnson Space Center in Houston. His July 1986 report was based on an official examination of the debris of the crew compartment, audio tapes and other data recorded on the shuttle, the remains of the astronauts, and photographs of the capsule as it fell after the shuttle exploded. In the report, Dr. Kerwin said: "The cause of death of the Challenger astronauts cannot be positively determined, the forces to which the crew were exposed during the orbiter breakup were probably not sufficient to cause death or serious injury, and the crew possibly, but not certainly, lost consciousness in the seconds following orbiter breakup due to in-flight loss of crew module pressure." In other words, they might well have lived for the full spiral down and might even have been fully conscious for all of that hellish descent. But even if so, this fabricated "transcript" does not preserve their final words. Jones, Alex.  "Withheld Shuttle Data: A Debate Over Privacy."
  The New York Times.  27 January 1987  (p. C1). Okie, Susan.  "Astronaut Autopsies Will Be Difficult."
  The Washington Post.  16 March 1986  (p. A14). Wilford, John Noble.  "A Grueling Autopsy for the Challenger."
  The New York Times.  9 February 1986  (p. D5). The Associated Press.  "NASA Says Challenger Crew Survived Briefly After Blast."
  The San Diego Union-Tribune.  29 July 1986  (p. A8). The Associated Press.  "Challenger Crew Made Bid for Life."
  The Record.  29 July 1986  (p. A1). "Tape Proves Doomed Shuttle Screamed, Cursed and Prayed."
  Weekly World News. 5 February 1991.
Claim:  An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2001] Jessie Jackson has added former Chicago democratic congressman Mel Reynolds to the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition's payroll. Reynolds was among the 176 criminals excused in President Clinton's last-minute forgiveness spree. Reynolds received a commutation of his six-and-a-half-year federal sentence for 15 convictions of wire fraud, bank fraud & lies to the Federal Election Commission. He is more notorious; however, for concurrently serving five years for sleeping with an underage campaign volunteer. This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate. His new job? Youth counselor. Origins:   We can't say with absolute certainty that what's described above is "a first in American politics," since the sexual peccadilloes of American politicians were not always as widely publicized as they are now, but the gist of the piece is true (although it originally circulated back in 2001, so it now references events that occurred many years ago and not just recently):  1995-1997: President Bill Clinton's involvement with Monica Lewinsky, then a 21-year-old unpaid White House intern working in the office of Leon Panetta, Clinton's Chief of Staff, is quite familiar to anyone who follows American politics. Monica Lewinsky  January 2001: The National Enquirer revealed that Jesse Jackson had been carrying on a four-year  affair with Karin L. Stanford, a 39-year-old former aide with his Rainbow/PUSH Coalition staff, and that Jackson had fathered the child Stanford bore in May 1999.  (Jackson has been married to Jacqueline Brown since 1962.) Karin L. Stanford  January 2001: Just before leaving office, President Clinton (at the urging of Jesse Jackson, among others) commuted the sentence of former Illinois congressman Mel Reynolds, who had spent 30 months in a state prison for statutory rape (i.e., having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer) and was serving a five-year sentence in federal prison for lying to obtain loans and illegally diverting campaign money for personal use. Mel Reynolds  January 2001: The Chicago Sun-Times reported that former congressman Mel Reynolds would be working as the community development director of Salem Baptist Church in south-side Chicago, and as a consultant for Jesse Jackson's Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, trying to decrease the number of young African-Americans going to prison. (Reynolds' position would be more accurately characterized as that of an advisor on prison reform rather than a "Youth counselor," however.) reported Rainbow/PUSH In February 2014, Mel Reynolds was arrested in Zimbabwe for violating immigration laws and possessing pornographic material and was later deported to South Africa.  In June 2015, Reynolds was indicted on charges of failing to file income tax returns from 2009 through 2012. arrested indicted   Last updated:  26 June 2015    Page, Susan.  "Who Gets a Pardon? It Depends on Who Asks."   USA Today.  20 March 2001  (p. A7).     Page, Susan and Mimi Hall.  "Pardon Drama Casts Wide Net."   USA Today.  23 Feburary 2001  (p. A7).     Sneed, Michael.  "Reynolds Might Be Really Enjoying the Ride."   Chicago Sun-Times.  25 February 2001  (p. 12).     Associated Press.  "Celeb Pardon Push."    Chicago Sun-Times.  "Farrakhan Back from the Brink." In August 2018, a bit of Islamophobic copypasta started making its way around social media, asserting that the mayor of Minneapolis, Minnesota had canceled a 4th of July city fireworks display but allowed "Muslim animal sacrifice" to be held in the city's U.S. Bank Stadium (home of the Minnesota Vikings football team) the following month: copypasta   This copypasta was based on a bit of fake news, a fear-mongering report about the Muslim holiday Eid al-Adha, and a misreading of two genuine news reports. Fake News On 10 June 2018, the Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that the Muslim mayor of Minneapolis had "canceled the 4th of July": article Mayor Ahneid al Ahmed of Haskentot, Minnesota has done the unthinkable and canceled the 4th of July. According to his office, the city has no desire to spend money on something so frivolous. Muslim spokesman Art Tubolls said: This city elected our mayor to do what is best. We dont hink buying a bunch of flags and fireworks and spending a day celebrating nationalism like nazis is a good idea. This was not a genuine news story about the mayor of Minneapolis, who is neither named "Ahneid al Ahmed" nor a Muslim. (The city's actual mayor is Jacob Frey.) The Last Line of Defense is part of a network of sites that engages in political trolling under the guise of proffering "satire." Jacob Frey This junk news piece may have prompted some confusion, as it resembled a genuine news story about a nearby Minnesota city. The mayor of St. Paul did cancel the city's Independence Day firework show due to budgetary concerns: cancel St. Paul will go without the rockets red glare on Independence Day this year. Mayor Melvin Carter announced that the city wont hold a Fourth of July fireworks event. The cancellation may foreshadow of what could be a difficult budget season. Carters announcement, posted to Facebook, cited concerns about the citys budget climate. Minneapolis, on the other hand, hosted multiple firework shows on July 4th. multiple firework shows Fear-Mongering Reports About Eid al-Adha The Muslim celebration of Eid al-Adha is also referred to as the "Feast of Sacrifice." The holiday, which honors Ibrahim's (Abraham's) willingness to sacrifice his son at God's command, is celebrated by Muslims around the world. In many places, Muslims observe that holiday by  sacrificing an animal and then sharing its meat with the poor: sacrificing To commemorate God's test of Ibrahim, many Muslim families sacrifice an animal and share the meat with the poor. They also are required to donate to charities that benefit the poor. Muslims also routinely exchange presents during the holiday. When it was announced that U.S. Bank Stadium would be hosting a Eid al-Adha festival, the Islamophobic web site "Bare Naked Islam" published an article about the upcoming event imploring readers to "imagine" 50,000 Muslims at the stadium and displaying various photographs and videos of animal sacrifices from around the world. article The following photograph, for instance, was taken in Lahore, Pakistan, in 2008: taken   These photographs led many readers to mistakenly believe that the "Super EID" festival at U.S. Bank Stadium would also feature animal sacrifices, but that wasn't the case. Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers of "Super EID," attempted to quell these fears, telling Minnesota Public Radio that no animal sacrifices would take place at the event: Minnesota Public Radio Eid Al-Adha, the second Muslim holiday of the year, comes at the end of the pilgrimage. Its name in Arabic means the "festival of sacrifice." Muslims celebrate by sacrificing animals and donating meat to charity. But Ahmed Anshur, executive director of Masjid Al-Ihsan Islamic Center in St. Paul and one of the organizers, wants to be clear: The actual ritual will not take place at U.S. Bank Stadium. "Nobody is going to sacrifice an animal, or nobody is going to slaughter an animal in that field," he said. "I can assure you that, 100 percent." The Minneapolis Star Tribune filed a report after the 21 August 2018 celebration on  which stated that in fact no animal sacrifices had taken place at the stadium during the EID celebration: report The holiday honors the prophet Ibrahim, also known as Abraham in Judaism and Christianity, and his willingness to sacrifice his son for God. It comes at the end of the annual hajj pilgrimage. It is one of the holiest days of the year for Muslims, who celebrate with prayer, shared meals and gifts. In some places, families who can afford it slaughter an animal and share the meat with family and charities. No animals were sacrificed at the stadium Tuesday. Bowling, Chris.  "Thousands Join in 'Super Eid' Celebration at U.S. Bank Stadium in Minneapolis."
  [Minneapolis] Star Tribune.  21 August 2018. Feshir, Riham.  "Thousands Expected for 'Super Eid' in Downtown Minneapolis."
  MPR News.  20 August 2018. CNN.  "5 Things to Know About the Muslim Holiday Eid al-Adha."
  21 August 2018. The Current.  "Fourth of July 2018: Where to See Fireworks in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and Beyond."
  26 June 2018. Melo, Frederick.  "St. Paul Mayor Cancels July 4 Fireworks, Cites Budget Concerns."
  TwinCities.com.  27 June 2018. In May 2021, a video started to circulate that supposedly showed U.S. President Joe Biden saying that people making less than $400,000 won't have to pay a single penny in taxes.  Joe Biden  This is a genuine clip showing a portion of the remarks Biden delivered during a visit to Tidewater Community College in Portsmouth, Virginia, on May 3, 2021. While the president said that people making under $400,000 would not pay a single penny in taxes during these remarks, that is not what is outlined in the Biden administration's tax plan. Biden misspoke here. A more accurate way of representing his tax plan would have been to say that people making under $400,000 would not see their taxes "raised" by a single penny.  remarks Biden delivered Here's how Fox News reported on this gaffe: Fox News reported President Biden reiterated his pledge that no American earning less than $400,000 would not pay "a single penny" in additional taxes with a slight twist on Monday, after he proposed several tax increases to fund two sweeping spending plans. Biden appeared to mistakenly leave out a key word during his speech at Tidewater Community College  instead saying that no one earning under his specified threshold would pay any taxes. Biden repeatedly promised during his 2020 presidential campaign that people making less than $400,000 "wont pay a penny more in taxes."  repeatedly promised 2020 presidential campaign   This campaign promise was included in Biden's proposal for the American Families Plan that was released in April 2021: released in April 2021 In all, the American Families Plan includes $1.8 trillion in investments and tax credits for American families and children over ten years. It consists of about $1 trillion in investments and $800 billion in tax cuts for American families and workers. Alongside the American Families Plan, the President will be proposing a set of measures to make sure that the wealthiest Americans pay their share in taxes, while ensuring that no one making $400,000 per year or less will see their taxes go up. When combined with President Bidens American Jobs Plan, this legislation will be fully paid for over 15 years, and will reduce deficits over the long term. Biden has repeatedly promised that people making less than $400,000 would not see their taxes raised under his plan. Although a video that showed him saying that people making less than a $400,000 won't "pay a single penny in taxes" is real, the president clearly misspoke during this portion of his speech. In December 2015, we looked into a bit of text being shared on social media which was said to represent the final words of Apple co-founder Steve Jobs. We hoped our article helped to put the kibosh on that false rumor, but in January 2019 a nearly identical speech was circulated anew, only this time attributed to a different billionaire with an eerily similar name: Steve Gouves. final words The "Steve Gouves death bed speech" was shared by many social media users in January 2019, with one of the most popular postings being that of Joshua Feurstein, an evangelical internet personality who has previously spread misinformation and is perhaps most famously known for railing about Starbucks' Christmas cups.  postings previously misinformation Fuerstein's posting included a photograph of a bearded man, presumably Mr. Steve Gouves, and the following text: posting   From my friend David Norrie Steve Gouves dies a billionaire, with a fortune of $ 7 billion, at the age of 56 from pancreatic cancer, and here are some of his last words: In other eyes, my life is the essence of success, but aside from work, I have a little joy, and in the end wealth is just a fact of life to which I am accustomed. At this moment, lying on the bed, sick and remembering all my life, I realize that all my recognition and wealth that I have is meaningless in the face of imminent death. You can hire someone to drive a car for you, make money for you - but you can not rent someone to carry the disease for you. One can find material things, but there is one thing that can not be found when it is lost - "life". Treat yourself well, and cherish others. As we get older we are smarter, and we slowly realize that the watch is worth $ 30 or $ 300 - both of which show the same time. Whether we carry a purse worth $ 30 or $ 300 - the amount of money in the wallets are the same. Whether we drive a car worth $ 150,000, or a car worth $ 30,000 - the road and distance are the same, we reach the same destination.If we drink a bottle worth $ 300 or wine worth $ 10 - the "stroller" will be the same. If the house we live in is 300 square meters, or 3000 square meters - the loneliness is the same.Your true inner happiness does not come from the material things of this world. Whether you're flying first class, or economy class - if the plane crashes, you crash with it. So, I hope you understand that when you have friends or someone to talk to - this is true happiness! Five Undeniable Facts- 1. Do not educate your children to be rich. Educate them to be happy. - So when they grow up they will know the value of things, not the price. 2. Eat your food as medicine, otherwise you will need to eat your medicine as food. 3. Whoever loves you will never leave you, even if he has 100 reasons to give up. He will always find one reason to hold on. 4. There is a big difference between being human and human being. 5. If you want to go fast - go alone! But if you want to go far - go together! And in conclusion,The six best doctors in the world.1. Sunlight2. Rest3. Exercise4. Diet5. Self-confidence6. Friends Keep them in all stages of life and enjoy a healthy life. "Love the people God sent you, one day he'll need them back." ??Something worth sharing!?? The man in this photograph is not "Steve Gouves" but rather James R. Kirouac, a "Level 2 Quantum Healing Hypnosis Technique Practitioner" with the company "Leading Edge Thought," who, as best we can tell at the time of this writing, is still very much alive: James R. Kirouac Leading Edge Thought   The first half of this text (everything preceding "Treat yourself well and cherish others) is a nearly verbatim copy of the fake deathbed speech falsely attributed to Steve Jobs back in 2015. That speech appears to have originated on a random blog and was never connected to Jobs in any real way. (You can read more about the actual last words of Steve Jobs here.) here The second half of this text has been circulating independently from the first since at least September 2015, when it was posted to a Chinese language blog at xuite.net. That posting was not attributed to Jobs, Guoves, or any other billionaire, and it was not shared as if it were a deathbed speech. September 2015 The fake Steve Jobs deathbed speech started making its way around the web in November 2015 and readers, apparently, have revised and expanded it over the years. At some point the text posted to xuite.net was tacked  onto the end of the original fake speech, Jobs' name was changed to Guoves, and an image of an unrelated bald man was employed to depict the fictional billionaire. tacked In short: Steve Guoves did not make this speech on his death bed because Steve Guoves does not exist. Much of this text was previously attributed to Steve Jobs, but the Apple co-founder did not utter those words on his death bed either. On 17 July 2016, the web site Newslo reported that Indiana governor Mike Pence, the newly-announced running mate of GOP candidate Donald Trump, had said allowing rape victims to have abortions would lead to women trying to get raped in order to have abortions: reported The Republican war on women continues unabated. The same week that conservatives argued in the Supreme Court that employers should be able to stop their employees from getting contraception outside of the company health plan, Indiana joined the ranks of states like Texas and Florida in passing a draconian law that purports to protect women, while in fact, endangering their health by making safe abortion much harder to get. And Gov. Mike Pence recently signed it. The bill is stuffed with as many asinine restrictions on abortion with an eye towards making abortion as miserable and humiliating an experience as possible, and ideally something women cant get legally at all. ... Pence also tried to offer his opinion on what would have happened had he allowed rape victims to still have abortion. First and foremost, because this is such a sensitive topic, let me just say that I sympathize with rape victims not just in America, but around the world. I can only imagine what it must be like to experience such trauma, he said. However, that does not justify murder, not even that justifies murdering a baby, not in my book. Because what would happen? Wed then have an epidemic of women claiming to have been raped just so they could have an abortion. And that has to be stopped at all cost. Donald Trumps new running mate also said, Basically, if Id have said no on the bill, that would be just like giving out get-pregnant-without-fear cards, because at the end of the day, women could have unprotected sex without worrying about what theyd do in the event of pregnancy. And you know, its not supposed to be like that ... And it gets worse  when you get an abortion, you get several days off of work and whatnot to recover. And there are a lot of crazy people out there. What if women would go out and get raped on purpose just so they could get off work? I mean, Indianas economy is struggling as it is, and having thousands of women absent from their jobs would be horrific for the state, Im telling you. I made the right call and that will be confirmed in the long run, Pence concluded. As with all content on Newslo (and its sister sites Religionlo and Politicalo), the item used a fact-based introduction to lead into counterfactual information. Pence did sign anti-abortion legislation in May 2016 but like all content published by that trio of fake news sites, the article included a "show facts" or "hide facts" button (all content displayed by default in "hide facts" mode): sign fake news  While the facts of the first paragraph were broadly true (as Pence had signed an abortion bill a few months prior), the remainder of the piece was embellished or entirely fabricated. Pence never said that women would attempt to get raped in order to have an abortion, to obtain days off work or for other reasons.  Newslo  Newslo Viagra Biblical hunger tests Antonin Scalia David Bowie The next presidential election may still be two and a half years away, but the presumptive Democratic frontrunner, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is all over the news. On May 16, 2014, in a speech at the New America Foundation, a moderate-to-liberal think tank, Clinton compared the United States and Canada on several measures of well-being. Clinton found the United States wanting. Canadian middle class incomes are now higher than in the United States, Clinton said. They are working fewer hours for more pay, enjoying a stronger safety net, living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. Well set aside the claim about the safety net, since thats tricky to measure statistically. But the other claims are ripe for a closer look. So well take them in order. (Clintons camp did not respond to our inquiry.) Canadian middle-class incomes are now higher than in the United States This is the trickiest of the measurements Clinton mentioned, for a couple reasons. First, theres no universally recognized definition of middle class in the available data. Second, theres more than one way to measure the data. Some measurements take a nations economic output as a whole and divide it by the population, whereas others sample individual people or households to find out how much they make, then find the midpoint. Clinton has support fromNew York Timesarticlethat looked at data from the Luxembourg Income Study database, which is based on surveys going back 35 years. The study surveyed people in various countries, asked them what they earned, then used a median to determine the mid-range income level. TheNew York Timesconcluded that median income in Canada pulled into a tie with median United States income in 2010 and has most likely surpassed it since then, due to studies conducted by other groups since 2010 suggest that pay in Canada has risen faster than pay in the United States. On the other hand, if you look at gross domestic product per capita --  the total amount of economic activity divided by population -- the United States tops Canada, and not by a trivial amount. In 2012, GDP per capita in theUnited Stateswas $51,689, compared to $41,559 forCanada, according to the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (These figures, as with all other money figures in this article, have been converted to U.S. dollars, so that they can be compared.) But this method has drawbacks. Because it represents an average across the entire economy, the final results tend to over-represent the income that flows to the wealthy. So its not ideal for measuring the middle class. Munroe Eagles, director of Canadian studies at the State University of New York-Buffalo, and Ross Burkhart, co-director of the Canadian Studies Program at Boise State University, told PolitiFact that using the Luxembourg Income Study is at least as good a measurement for Clintons claim as the other figures, if not better. They are working fewer hours for more pay than Americans OECD data for the average number of hours worked annually per employed person shows that Clinton is correct. In theUnited Statesin 2012, workers spent 1,790 hours per year on the job, compared to 1,710 hours per year inCanada. One could say that Americans are working harder and producing more goods and services, but Clintons point was that Canadians have greater opportunities for leisure, and on that point, the statistics support her point. As for getting more pay, OECD statistics for 2012 show that the average annual wages for workers in Canada were $58,376, compared to $55,048 in the United States. This measures the average wages earned by a full-time, full-year employee. These statistics support Clintons claim. Canadians are living longer OECD data for life expectancy at birth shows that in 2011,Canadianscould expect to live 81 years, while in 2009, the most recent year available,Americanscould expect to live 78.7 years. So Clintons right on this one, too. Theres less income inequality in Canada The primary statistic used for gauging income inequality is the Ginicoefficient. Gini coefficients range from 0, or perfect equality, to 1, or perfect inequality. According to the OECD, the Gini coefficient for Canada in 2010 was .320, compared to .380 in the United States. That means Canada is modestly more equal than the United States is, which is what Clinton had claimed. Overall, the five comparisons Clinton made are reasonable and arent cherry-picked or subject to statistical quirks, Burkhart said. It's fair, in my understanding of the Canadian and U.S. economies, for Ms. Clinton to make the kinds of comparisons that Ms. Clinton has made, Burkhart said. Our ruling Clinton said that Canadian middle class incomes are now higher than in the United States. They are working fewer hours for more pay,  living longer on average, and facing less income inequality. Shes indisputably correct on four of these five measures, and the data is more mixed on the fifth. On balance, we rate her claim Mostly True. A June 2023 Twitter thread from Democratic presidential primary challenger Robert F. Kennedy Jr. that began with a video of him performing pushups also stated an allegedly science-based fact  that the average American gained 29 pounds during the lockdowns of the early COVID-19 pandemic. There are several ways in which this statement is false. Twitter thread  First, Kennedy misrepresented the findings of the survey he cited. Second, that survey  even when read correctly  does not properly address the question Kennedy claimed it addresses. And third, published clinical data suggest the pandemic did not have a significant overall effect on weight and, instead, followed a trend of an increase in the average weight of Americans that has existed since well before the pandemic. In an email to Snopes, Kennedy conceded that this critique was valid. "I appreciate you catching my mistake and alerting me," he wrote. The statistic Kennedy (partially) quoted comes from a 2021 survey conducted by the American Psychological Association. That study found that 42% of people gained unwanted weight during the pandemic, and within that subset of people the average weight gain was 29 pounds. 2021 survey APA's survey of U.S. adults, conducted in late February 2021 by The Harris Poll, shows that a majority of adults (61%) experienced undesired weight changesweight gain or losssince the pandemic started, with 42% reporting they gained more weight than they intended. Of those, they gained an average of 29 pounds (the median amount gained was 15 pounds) and 10% said they gained more than 50 pounds, the poll found. majority of adults (61%) experienced undesired weight changes When the pool of individuals you are looking at includes only people who reported gaining weight (and not, for example, the people who say they lost or maintained weight during the same period of time) the number is going to be significantly higher. Kennedy's claim relies on the notion that the only Americans that existed during the pandemic are those who gained weight. This same survey indicated that "18% of U.S. adults report undesired weight loss, with an average weight loss of 26 lbs." same survey In response to our question about his use of this data, Kennedy responded to Snopes by email stating that he was in error. "I made an error in describing 29 lbs as a national average," he wrote. The APA survey did not gather weight data on any individual. Instead these data stem from surveys carried out by the APA, Stress In America, that measure "attitudes and perceptions of stress among the general public". This particular survey, the Pandemic Anniversary Survey, was conducted roughly a year into the pandemic in February 2021. It had a sample size of just over 3,000 individuals: Stress In America sample size The Pandemic Anniversary Survey was conducted online within the United States by The Harris Poll on behalf of the American Psychological Association between Feb. 19 and 24, 2021, among 3,013 adults age 18+ who reside in the U.S.  The survey questions were designed to identify perceptions of stress, not to quantify standardized measurements of weight. Reports of undesired weight gain, in this sort of study, are entirely self-reported. Even if used in good faith, such a survey would not be an appropriate gauge of actual trends of weight gain or loss in America. In contrast to the APA study and its 3,000 participants, a research paper published by the Epic Health Research Network (EHRN) analyzed anonymized medical data collected from nearly 20 million patients across America at multiple times before, at the onset of, and during the pandemic, as explained in the July 2021 publication: research paper These data come from Cosmos, a HIPAA Limited Data Set of more than 111 million patients. [...] Data are pooled from 128 healthcare organizations representing 640 hospitals that span 49 states and cover 19,573,285 patients. This includes 15,663,833 patients in the year prior to the pandemic and 14,922,615 patients over the course of the pandemic. Cosmos, its website says, is the "largest integrated database of clinical information in the United States." Composed of anonymized clinical records, the dataset is a product of a software company that manages medical records in many American hospitals. Epic Research is an arm of this collection of companies publishing papers based on their Cosmos dataset. says many American hospitals In the study, the researchers found that an almost equal number of individuals gained weight as lost weight during the pandemic: found We evaluated weight change for adults during the pandemic compared to weight change for adults in the year prior to the pandemic. A weight loss or gain of 2.5 pounds, which we define as a normal fluctuation or "no change," was most common, both pre-pandemic and during the pandemic. Nearly as many patients lost weight (35%) as gained weight (39%) during the pandemic. By utilizing data from before the pandemic, from the start of the pandemic, and from during the pandemic, the researchers were also able to compare rates of weight gain or loss year by year. As described in the study, the period of time from the onset of the pandemic into May 2021 brought slightly higher average body weight than the preceding time period, but this was in line with a national trend of increasing average weight: described The average adult weight over time has increased, as shown in Figure 3 [below]. The slight increase in the average adult weight during the pandemic period of less than one pound is consistent with the previous trend. Weight change patterns were similar regardless of age and sex.  Their findings also put the extremity of Kennedy's claim in perspective. The clinical data indicates that only about 2% of individuals gained more than 27.5 pounds during the early pandemic: only about 2%  Because no study actually says that the average American gained 29 pounds during the early pandemic, because the study used to reach that conclusion  even if interpreted correctly  is ill-suited for the purpose Kennedy used it, and because nationwide clinical data suggest otherwise, the claim is False. Alban, Chris, et al. Pandemic Pound Theories Don't Hold Weight. https://epicresearch.org/articles/pandemic-pound-theories-dont-hold-weight. Accessed 6 July 2023. Epic Cosmos. https://cosmos.epic.com/. Accessed 6 July 2023. Jennings, Katie. "The Billionaire Who Controls Your Medical Records." Forbes, https://www.forbes.com/sites/katiejennings/2021/04/08/billionaire-judy-faulkner-epic-systems/. Accessed 6 July 2023. "One Year on: Unhealthy Weight Gains, Increased Drinking Reported by Americans Coping with Pandemic Stress." APA, https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2021/03/one-year-pandemic-stress. Accessed 6 July 2023. Slightly More Than 6 in 10 U.S. Adults (61%) Report Undesired Weight Change Since Start of Pandemic. https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/2021/03/march-weight-change. Accessed 6 July 2023. "Stress in America." APA, https://www.apa.org/news/press/releases/stress. Accessed 6 July 2023. In late May 2023, a number of Twitter accounts retweeted and criticized a post supposedly written on May 28 by U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (AOC), about farmers: retweeted and criticized  (@Shamrock168339/Twitter)   (@GSchifanelli/Twitter) Contrary to what most of these users apparently assumed, however, the "Farming should be illegal" tweet attributed to AOC was actually posted by a parody account: "Farming should be illegal" tweet AOC parody account  (@AOCpress/Twitter) It was a joke. AOC did not tweet that "Farming should be illegal." No such tweet or sentiment appeared on her official Twitter account. Twitter users were similarly fooled by a previous tweet from the parody account, also fact-checked by Snopes, in which Ocasio-Cortez supposedly said "Printing money is the only way out of inflation." previous tweet fact-checked by Snopes In a May 30 tweet from her official account, Ocasio-Cortez informed the public that the parody account was "impersonating" her and "releasing false policy statements," and noted that Twitter owner Elon Musk "has engaged it, boosting its visibility": May 30 tweet FYI there's a fake account on here impersonating me and going viral. The Twitter CEO has engaged it, boosting visibility. It is releasing false policy statements and gaining spread. I am assessing with my team how to move forward. In the meantime, be careful of what you see.  Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) May 30, 2023 May 30, 2023  This is the @AOCpress tweet that Musk engaged with:  (@elonmusk/Twitter) Snopes has also fact-checked fake tweets attributed to AOC that were created image-editing software. In one such fake tweet that circulated during the COVID-19 pandemic, she allegedly urged that businesses be kept closed until after the 2020 election. In another, she allegedly called for Democrats to commence with "The Purge" (a reference to the 2013 horror film) after U.S. President Joe Biden was elected. businesses be kept closed commence with "The Purge" 2013 horror film For background, here iswhywe sometimes write about satire/humor. why Mikkelson, David. "Did AOC Tweet That Businesses Should Be Shut Down Until the Election?" Snopes, 23 June 2020, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/aoc-businesses-closed-tweet/. Palma, Bethania. "No, AOC Didn't Tweet About 'The Purge.'" Snopes, 12 Jan. 2021, https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/fake-aoc-purge-tweet/. In March 2021, fake email renewals for Norton Internet Security landed in inboxes and spam folders, and warned of devices infected with viruses. An example email had the subject line: "your norton subscription has expired your device has been infected with viruses n020953." A variation said the same thing with a different ending number: "your norton subscription has expired your device has been infected with viruses n915093." The email that appeared to be from "Norton-Support2021" notified users that their supposed subscription to Norton Internet Security had expired.  The Norton renewal offer was a scam.  The headline claimed that recipients' devices had become infected with viruses. However, that seemingly important item didn't appear in the body of the email: EXPIRATION NOTIFICATION Our records indicate that your subscription to Norton Internet Security Expired on: 20 Feb 2021 11:11:22 -0500 Therefore, you are no longer receiving automatic updates that protect you against the latest threats, including viruses, spyware, hackers, and identity thieves. If you are browsing, banking, shopping, checking email or doing anything online, we highly recommend you renew your subscription now and get the new Norton Internet Security. Renew Now You will receive a full year of protection for up to 3 household PCs and peace of mind when you're online. Sincerely,The Norton Team This was not a legitimate email from Norton AntiVirus or Norton Internet Security. In an example email we reviewed, all links in the message pointed to a website hosted on a Brazilian domain. The "unsubscribe" link at the bottom of the message led to the scam as well. If readers receive a suspicious email that claims to be from Norton, desktop users can safely hover over links (but not click on them) in order to see where they lead. If they don't go to an official Norton website, such as "norton.com," do not click the link. Also, the email address the message came from appeared to begin with "Norton-Support2021@" and end with a long string of random letters. The email address did not end in "@norton.com" or anything similar. The company published a page to help keep Norton users safe from these kinds of renewal email virus scams. For example, it listed several email addresses they used to send official correspondence: norton@nortonlifelock.com, norton@secure.norton.com, ems@norton.com, lifelock@secure.norton.com, and information@mail.nortonstore.hk. published a page It's true that Norton may send renewal offers. However, such offers will never arrive with completely lowercase subject lines. Further, there was no indication that Norton notifies customers "your device has been infected with viruses" in renewal email offers. "The URLs in our emails point to the server at: https://secure.norton.com. Make sure that the URLs begin with https:// and has a norton.com or lifelock.com domain." Norton users who run the company's apps will potentially receive official emails from noreply@norton.com, no-reply@nortonlifelock.com, NortonAccount@norton.com, norton@nortonlifelock.com, and management@norton.com. Other email addresses are covered on the Norton Support page. Norton Support page We've covered concerns regarding computer viruses since the 1990s. For example, the purported virus in a Budweiser frogs screensaver first made the rounds in 1997. Thankfully, it was a hoax. made the rounds Twenty-four years later, the Norton emails being received by readers were not a hoax. We recommend proceeding with caution when reviewing potentially harmful messages. Hovering over links to see where they lead is safe, but clicking on them may not be. In sum, fake renewal email offers appeared to be from Norton Internet Security and claimed that devices were infected with viruses. This was not official correspondence from the company. The scams should be avoided. Hillary Clinton, riding a bump in the polls, kept the heat on Donald Trump during a speech in Cincinnati that marked the first time she had campaigned alongside Elizabeth Warren, a favorite of the progressive wing of her party. Risk analysts listed Donald Trump, a Donald Trump presidency, as one of the top threats facing the global economy, ahead of terrorism, Clinton said during thespeechon June 27, 2016. We dont take a position on whether Trump actuallyisone of the top threats facing the global economy. But we thought wed check to see whether Clinton has solid evidence that professional risk analysts have made that argument. So is Clinton right about how analysts have rated Trump? Basically, yes. When we asked the Clinton campaign what she was referring to, they pointed us to the periodic rankings of global risk published by the Economist Intelligence Unit. The Economist Intelligence Unit -- an affiliate ofThe Economist, the London-based newsweekly -- is aresearch and analysisfirm that supplies clients, including businesses, with information about opportunities and risks around the world. The firmmade headlines in March 2016when it listed the possibility of a Trump presidency as one of the biggest threats to companies capacity to operate at target profitability. The rankings are based on qualitative judgments of a how powerfully an event could affect the world and how likely it is to happen, the firm says. In its March ratings, the firm rated the risks from a Trump presidency as 12 on a 25-point scale. That ranked Trump sixth among the 10-item list of biggest threats, tied with the rising threat of jihadi terrorism destabilising the global economy. But the Trump threat level increased in theJuly 2016 rankings. A Trump presidency now ranks as the third-biggest global threat, with an increased score of 16 on the 25-point scale. In the meantime, the risk from jihadi terrorism has remained constant with a score of 12. In the July ratings, the only higher scores were 20 for China experiences a hard landing and, in a tie with Trump, a 16 for currency volatility and persistent commodity prices weakness. Specifically, the firm wrote that although we do not expect Mr. Trump to defeat his most likely Democratic contender, Hillary Clinton, there are risks to this forecast, especially in the event of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil or a sudden economic downturn. The writeup cited his hostility to free trade, his hard line on Muslims, his militaristic tendencies, his skepticism toward NATO, and his indifference to nuclear proliferation in Asia. The firm had never rated a pending candidacy to be a geopolitical risk to the United States and the world,an official told Politico. We checked with Robert Powell, the Economist Intelligence Units New York-based global risk briefing manager, to see whether he thought Clintons phrasing was accurate, and he said it was. Her quote does accurately describe our global risk scenarios, Powell told PolitiFact. Despite the high likelihood of more terrorist attacks, the impact on the global economy tends to be relatively slight -- indeed, most global stock markets rose on the day of the Brussels attacks, for instance. However, given that the U.S. economy is the biggest in the world, we believe a Trump presidency would have a major impact on the entire global economy. Clinton said risk analysts -- plural -- had determined Trump to be a threat, but we were unable to find any equivalent of the Economist Intelligence Unit report. (Clinton campaign spokesman Josh Schwerin said that analysts was intended to refer to the multiple analysts within the Economist Intelligence Unit who came up with the ratings.) But we did find another major economic report that painted a grim picture of what could happen to the economy if Trump wins. On June 17, Moodys Analytics, an economic research and data-services firm,published its projectionsof what could happen to the economy under Trump-backed policies on taxes, government spending, immigration and international trade. (We fact-checked thepolitical backgroundof one of the Moody's authors in another report.) Four basic conclusions regarding the impact of Mr. Trumps economic proposals can be reached, the Moodys team wrote. One, they will result in a less global U.S. economy; two, they will lead to larger government deficits and more debt; three, they will largely benefit very high-income households; and four, they will result in a weaker U.S. economy, with fewer jobs and higher unemployment. Our ruling Clinton said, Risk analysts listed Donald Trump, a Donald Trump presidency, as one of the top threats facing the global economy, ahead of terrorism. The analysts at one firm, the Economist Intelligence Unit, have declared the possibility of Trumps election to be the third-greatest global risk in its current rankings, a risk level that has only grown since the firm began including Trump in its rankings in March. And Clinton has accurately noted that the risk factor given to a Trump presidency is higher than the rating for Islamic terrorism on the firms list. We rate the statement True. https://www.sharethefacts.co/share/99685807-e596-4fa7-ad2e-de8cc4063c57