Trivial Pursuit

Remove all ads!

HB has it, with one minor misspelling: Tenzing Norkay. Your turn, feather-foot.

@Magpie & T2B:
You guys want to start a new topic to discuss this?

 

Wow. I got one right. Sir Edmund Hillary is pretty much one of the most revered New Zealander is history so you would expect most of us to know the name of his sherpa buddy.

Hmm, a new question....... not sure if this is really easy or not, but:

The Maori name for New Zealand is Aotearoa. What does word translate to in English?

 

Place of many Islands ?

 

Bah, New Zealand probably has less islands than the Finnish archipelago.

I think it was Land of the White Cloud or something similar.

 

Morgoroth is right enough. Aotearoa means Land of the Long Whie Cloud. You're up, Flayer-Fin.

 

Let's throw a softball to the game for a change. Which were the three sole capitols of war involved countries in Europe that were not occupied at some point by the enemy during WW2?

 

Warsaw, London and Moscow?

 

London, Moscow, Helsinki.

 

London, Moscow, Vienna?

 

The Magpie got it right. Did you know it or did the fact that I come from Finland give it away?

Finland managed to get an armtice signed with the Soviet Union in 1944 due to the fact that Stalin became less interested in Finland and wanted to fully concentrate upon the attack on the German controlled Poland and the defensive victory of Tali-Ihantala were Finland managed to stop the Soviet offensive that had initially broken our defensive lines. Therefore Helsinki was never occupied joining Moscow and London in that cathegory.

 

Well, I've been to Finland & could remember about them holding lines against the Soviet Union in WWII. But yes, the fact that you were from Finland helped confirm my suspiscion that they never reached Helsinki. London & Moscow I just knew.

Johann Bechner (1635-82) proposed that fire was "phlogiston" liberated from materials by burning. What physically impossible property was given to phlogiston to try and explain the observations made of burning objects?

[ November 13, 2005, 14:13: Message edited by: The Magpie ]

 

It goes against gravity?

 

Very close, but no cigar. "Going against gravity" isn't physically impossible per se, as long as you have sufficent force acting to oppose gravitiational pull (most commonly, buoyancy forces keep planes up and set up convection currents). However, you're not very far off... I was thinking more of the effect burning has on a substance, compared before and after the process. When certain observations were made, some parts of the scientific community who were wedded to the phlogiston idea tried to finesse it to fit the new data, using a wholly bananas premise, more fundamental than saying it "goes against gravity".

 

That you can end up with more matter after the burning than you had before, therefore violating one or more of the laws of thermodynamics?

 

My other idea is - it goes up, which is not that easily explainable so I went with against gravity.

 

Volume without mass.

 

O.K., HB got what it was they were trying to explain...

 

Woohoo. Hmm, it's not easy to think of a question. How about:

What achievement is often attributed to New Zealander Richard Pearse? Many people claim that he did this thing before the people who are generally accepted to have been first to do it.

 

Went to Antarctica?

 

Achieved flight?