#1's History Teacher insists that Margaret Thatcher and Augusto Pinochet were cousins.
Not only do I not believe that is the case, I have never head the suggestion before and nor I can find nothing anywhere to suggest that it is. But just before I get on my soapbox, does anybody wish to tell me different?
MT was born in Grantham I think and AP was born in Valparaiso. Two more different places one could not imagine.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Mon 24 Jun 19 at 16:25
|
I think perhaps the history teacher was making a joke.
If it were true that would be the definition of irony.
www.geni.com/people/Margaret-Thatcher/6000000009590563861
|
|
No, he wasn't making a joke. In fact he was so vehement about the fact that I suddenly had a doubt myself.
|
If he is a historian he won't mind quoting a source?
I wonder which of Pinochet's parents, Augusto Pinochet Vera,and Avelina Ugarte Martínez, was the brother or sister of Alfred Roberts or Ethel Stephenson.
Maybe one of them was adopted.
|
|
Perhaps he is getting mixed up with King George V and Wilhelm II?
|
Pinochet?
Was he the bloke who played saxophone on Baker Street?
|
>> Pinochet?
>>
>> Was he the bloke who played saxophone on Baker Street?
No that was Bob Holness of blockbuster fame
www.youtube.com/watch?v=kKhnVvHWJ3A
|
>>No that was Bob Holness of blockbuster fame
And the collective term for a group of baboons is a flange.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Holness#Baker_Street
|
A few years back, at primary school, our son had to answer a teacher set question as to "why the moon was colder than the earth". He answered that it was hotter by day and colder by night due to the lack of an atmosphere.
No said the teacher, it was always colder than earth because it was further away from the sun.......
Where do you begin with some people?
|
Many teachers when I was at school were asses.
I had a couple that insisted that I write with my right hand - seriously - with the slipper if I didn't and this was in the early 70's. That is until my parents found out and threatened to clobber them.
I also remember some who would punish you for contradicting them, even when they were blatantly wrong.
There was also several racist teachers at my secondary school who would always round on the black kids.
We had to pull the metal work teacher off one of our classmates after he went for the 14 year old lad with a heavy metal bar in hand for a bit of playground lip. Of course nothing happened to the brute, even though the lad ended up in the nurses office with cuts. He even became a local councilor.
|
|
Whilst my wife was assisting in a science lesson at a local middle school several years ago, she overheard the teacher telling the class that the best way tp preserve the fizz in a bottle of fizzy drink was to squeeze the (PET) bottle to reduce the gas 'void' after pouring a drink out. A couple of years later, he went on to become a specialist science advisor.
|
I recall my eldest coming home from school at 12, livid that her headmaster had told her that she should aim for being a nurse rather than being a doctor!
The same man also told her that she wouldn't get better than a "C" grade at GCSE mathematics at 15 when she had already passed it at 14 with an "A*" and would not accept that he was wrong. Same for Physics, Chemistry and Biology. She taught herself history and geography because the school only ever had supply teachers for those subjects and they never knew where they were with the curriculum.
The local popular 6th form college told her not to bother with the sciences as they would prove too difficult - it had it's favorite feeder schools and eldest had not attended any of them. On hearing that she wanted to be a doctor, another teacher said "good luck with that!" - sarcastically.
She got 98% or above in all of her "A" levels - first go - all "A*" grades (chemistry, physics, biology), whist holding down a job on Saturday and volunteering to do the make up / nails and hair for sick patients at the local hospital so they would look good for their visitors on a Sunday.
|
|
Pardon myscientific ignorance but would not sqeezing and distorting a plastic bottle with the lid on reduce the volume of space in the bottle and therefore increase the pressure of the gas and so maintain a higher level of dissolved gas in the liquid?
|
"Pardon myscientific ignorance......"
Pour out, say, half the contents of the bottle, squeeze out the gas to reduce the size of the bottle, then screw the lid back on; that is what was being recommended.
|
But surely that would also work. By reducing the volume the dissolved gas has to expand into less gas will need to escape from the liquid beforel a pressure equilibrium between the gas in the liquid and that in the space above it is achieved.
A recorked bottle of champagne from which one glass has been removed will retain its sparkle longer than a near empty bottle
Where am I and the teacher going wrong?
|
"Where am I and the teacher going wrong?"
Remember that the plastic, flexible, re-closed bottle will start to blow out as soon as gas comes out of the liquid and, if it has been squeezed in, then it will accommodate gas even before the bottle is blown out to its original size. The gas space will not meet any 'back-pressure' (to maintain the fizz) until the bottle is blown out to its full size again.
I agree that, if the bottle were made of some sort of material that when squeezed, would not blow out again, then pressure would be (nearly) maintained.
|
|
I think you are wrong and I have proved it. I squeeze deformable bottles so the free space inside disappears, and the gas stays dissolved in the liquid. Dont forget you have atmosphere acting on the outside
|
|
The only things that keep CO2 absorbed in carbonated drinks is the pressure of gas above the liquid surface and the temp. Compare how quickly two identical bottles go flat, one opened the other unopened. The unopened bottle is pressurised, the opened bottle is at atmospheric pressure. A squeezed PET bottle has more volume to fill with gas before the bottle returns to it's original shape and the gas pressure above the liquid reaches the equilibrium point where it supresses any more release of C02. A fizzy drink in a squeezed PET bottle will go flat quicker than a non-squeezed bottle.
|
"The only things that keep CO2 absorbed in carbonated drinks is the pressure of gas above the liquid surface and the temp..................."
Kevin has got it.
Kevin ........ top of the class for logical thinking.
CG & Zero ........ stick to art and religious studies.
|
Yes Kevin has got it
You on the other hand have not. Reread what Zero and I said.
|
"You on the other hand have not. Reread what Zero and I said."
Yes - I did read what you said - and you started to introduce glass bottles and partially-rigid Coke bottles to fudge the issue. Good luck to you if you try and squeeze the air out of a half-full champagne bottle!
|
Not sure why you can't simply say " for the example you gave you would be correct"
|
"Not sure why you can't simply say " for the example you gave you would be correct""
Yes - but that's not what is being discussed. Let me try and express it more simply.
If I buy two identical 2 litre PET bottles of Sainsbury's Basic Lemonade, then empty them so that they are both half-full. On one, I allow the bottle to flip out to its original shape and screw the cap on; for the other, I squeeze out the gas to make the volume above the liquid smaller - then I screw the cap on.
Question - in which bottle will the remaining lemonade go flattest first?
No champagne bottles, no semi-rigid Coke bottles, no other red herrings.
|
>> If I buy two identical 2 litre PET bottles of Sainsbury's Basic Lemonade, then empty
>> them so that they are both half-full. On one, I allow the bottle to flip
>> out to its original shape and screw the cap on; for the other, I squeeze
>> out the gas to make the volume above the liquid smaller - then I screw
>> the cap on.
This is the first time you have specified a bottle size. Make your mind up.
|
"This is the first time you have specified a bottle size. Make your mind up."
O me miserum.
|
I would say that if the bottle issue is sufficiently flimsy to regain it's shape as the co,2 escapes from the dissolved liquid it would make no difference.
However you did not specify the nature of the bottle and since in my experience and quoted example such bottles do not regain their original volume when crushed my answer was correct as in fact was the teacher's.
You seem very ready to denigrate others. Sometimes you need to acknowledge you are wrong.
|
"You seem very ready to denigrate others."
I didn't denigrate you; I'm sure that you'll do very well in art and religious studies.
|
You still seem unable to accept that, for the example I gave I was correct.
Go on. It's not that hard.
|
"You still seem unable to accept that, for the example I gave I was correct. "
Sorry, which bit are you referring to? Remember, I was talking about a PET (polyethylene terephthalate) bottle, not a toughened glass champagne bottle (unsqueezable).
If you are talking about the bit where you said compared a slightly emptied champagne bottle with an almost empty bottle, then of course you are correct - but that is a red herring.
How do you view the question that I posted at 11:54?
""If I buy two identical 2 litre PET bottles of Sainsbury's Basic Lemonade, then empty them so that they are both half-full. On one, I allow the bottle to flip out to its original shape and screw the cap on; for the other, I squeeze out the gas to make the volume above the liquid smaller - then I screw the cap on.
Question - in which bottle will the remaining lemonade go flattest first?""
The conversation is about flexible plastic (PET) bottles - NOT thick glass champagne bottles.
One more squeak of this nonsense, and I'll know that it's a wind-up!
|
The Champagne bottle is a red herring, because every fewl kno that putting the handle of a spoon into the bottle keeps the bubbles in.
Dont ask me why it does, I dont know and I have no explanation, but it does.
|
According to this, there's some slight evidence, and a bit of a theory but, if you want your champers to be pleasantly fizzy, then just get it down your neck. The spoon won't keep it fizzy for long.
www.yuppiechef.com/spatula/myth-or-magic-champagne/
|
A fizzy drink in a
>> squeezed PET bottle will go flat quicker than a non-squeezed bottle.
Sorry, in practise they dont. Been there, done that tried it out.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 25 Jun 19 at 11:34
|
>Sorry, in practise they dont. Been there, done that tried it out.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVGXUrKJVCU
|
I was envisaging a bottle that maintained its crushed shape as indeed I believe a small Coke bottle will.
I will check it out.
Experiment.
|
This teacher is a total a***. He is prone to this sort of absolute certainty on stuff he's read on a bathroom wall somewhere.
Just that this time he's certainty unnerved me, dunno why, so thought I better make certain.
|
My school report at twelve said I 'had little or no artistic ability'. It was right.
My daughter had an argument with her English language teacher over grammar. He was honest enough to admit he started to have doubts about his position, but he was right.
|
>> My school report at twelve said I 'had little or no artistic ability'. It was
>> right.
>>
>> My daughter had an argument with her English language teacher over grammar. He was honest enough to admit he started to have doubts about his position, but he was right.
>>
My teachers were not very good.
I'd like to meet the idiot who said, "Robin shows promise and should go far".
|
Surely this is a linguistic or cultural issue?
The geology of Margaret Hilda T and Pinochet must be easily established. Either his family have Lincolnshire connections or hers had links to Chile. Second or third cousins with or without degrees of removal?
Otherwise they're cousins politically which is a different kettle of fish.
|
>> The geology of Margaret Hilda T and Pinochet must be easily established.
...well, they both had hearts of stone.....
|
How on earth is it a matter of language or culture?
Really, you can be rather silly sometimes.
I'm perfectly aware of the family relationships required to generate cousins and the geographical implications.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Tue 25 Jun 19 at 01:28
|
>> How on earth is it a matter of language or culture?
>>
>> Really, you can be rather silly sometimes.
>>
>> I'm perfectly aware of the family relationships required to generate cousins and the geographical implications.
>>
I'm starting from point that there is some translation involved one way or the other and possibility that words for cousin or the concept of cousin may be different in Chile/Chilean Spanish. Is it actually an assertion was that they were cousins politically or via their apparent friendship?
I may of course be completely wrong but not sure it's that silly as a suggestion.
|
>> How on earth is it a matter of language or culture?
Is it actually an assertion was that they were cousins politically or via their apparent friendship?
Differing languages and cultures could easily explain this, for example, the expressions of 'brothers in arms' or 'sisterhood' could easily end up mis-translated.
In spoken french 'le beau frère' could be 'beautiful brother' or 'brother in law'
( although I think that to be correct it requires a hyphen??? )
|
|
Cousins. As in related, of the same family. It's not difficult.
|
>> Cousins. As in related, of the same family. It's not difficult.
If that's what's meant than it is indeed not difficult. Any respectable historian could knock it down by reference to the antecedents of Alderman Roberts and his wife both of whom seem to be of solidly British stock. General Pinochet's parents were, according to Wikipedia, third or fourth generation Chileans. There seems no conceivable possibility of their parents being siblings or even of a more distant cousin-ship removed by generations.
The whole hypothesis seems absurd. So absurd that one might seek an alternative explanation such as that posited by myself and others that there could be a nuance of language/meaning.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 25 Jun 19 at 16:13
|
I have seen the phrase "cousins* under the skin" used to describe people of similar outlook/actions.
*and other kinships
|
Indeed "no conceivable possibility".
However, there was an awful lot of Brit/Chileno gene sharing which went on in the last 200yrs or so, enough just to want to make absolutely sure I wasn't missing a fact.
|
>>there could be a nuance of language/meaning.
Let it go, there isn't.
|
>> Let it go, there isn't.
Fair enough. It's OK to assume the teacher is an ignorant/arrogant wazzock.
It was not unreasonable in replying to your OP to posit other theories. It wasn't just me suggesting some sort of oddity of language etc.
You didn't need to post a dismissive response that was bound to rile.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Wed 26 Jun 19 at 23:06
|
|
Maybe in describing Thatcher and Pinochet as 'cousins', someone along the line was simply expressing an opinion that their ideologies were similar/related?
|
>> Maybe in describing Thatcher and Pinochet as 'cousins', someone along the line was simply expressing
>> an opinion that their ideologies were similar/related?
That, overlaid with language and similar issues, was my start point.
|
Thatcher & Pinochet - Duncan
