- 19,013
- Jersey V.1.0
- axletramp
Honestly, I didn't think anyone had noticed.
If it wasn't a spoof news site I'd be tagging @SurebossHonestly, I didn't think anyone had noticed.
A man whose job was to test gold for purity at the Royal Canadian Mint is accused of stealing $135,000 in precious metal—in his rectum. Leston Lawrence, 35, was known to set off the Mint's metal detectors more often than most, but he always passed a search with a hand-held wand, according to prosecutors. They say that's because Lawrence smuggled coins and 18 unmarked gold nuggets out of the Mint hidden in his rectum, then took them to a gold buyer, where he received checks for about $5,000 per piece between November 2014 and March 2015, reports the Ottawa Citizen. After noticing the high number of checks, however, a bank teller discovered Lawrence worked at the Mint and alerted authorities, prosecutors say.
The Mint—where "gold is left sitting around in open buckets," says Lawrence's lawyer, Gary Barnes—could find no record of the alleged thefts, but investigators say they found four nuggets in Lawrence's possession after executing a search warrant. The nuggets are in the shape of the Mint's "dipping spoon," which is not available commercially, notes the newspaper. Investigators also found Vaseline in Lawrence's work locker. A security employee proved one could pass a security check with a hand-held wand while smuggling gold via the butt, investigators say. Still, Barnes argues there's no proof Lawrence's gold came from the Mint, per the Toronto Sun. He's charged with theft, laundering the proceeds of crime, possession of stolen property, and breach of trust. A decision is expected Nov. 9. (Your butt is welcome to touch this gold toilet.)
Fixed.The Mint—where "gold is left sitting around in open buttocks," says Lawrence's lawyer, Gary Barnes—could find no record of the alleged thefts.
Ig Nobel prizesReproduction Prize - The late Ahmed Shafik, for testing the effects of wearing polyester, cotton, or wool trousers on the sex life of rats.
Economics Prize - Mark Avis and colleagues, for assessing the perceived personalities of rocks, from a sales and marketing perspective.
Physics Prize - Gabor Horvath and colleagues, for discovering why white-haired horses are the most horsefly-proof horses, and for discovering why dragonflies are fatally attracted to black tombstones.
Chemistry Prize - Volkswagen, for solving the problem of excessive automobile pollution emissions by automatically, electromechanically producing fewer emissions whenever the cars are being tested.
Medicine Prize - Christoph Helmchen and colleagues, for discovering that if you have an itch on the left side of your body, you can relieve it by looking into a mirror and scratching the right side of your body (and vice versa).
Psychology Prize - Evelyne Debey and colleagues, for asking a thousand liars how often they lie, and for deciding whether to believe those answers.
Peace Prize - Gordon Pennycook and colleagues, for their scholarly study called "On the Reception and Detection of Pseudo-Profound ********".
Biology Prize - Awarded jointly to: Charles Foster, for living in the wild as, at different times, a badger, an otter, a deer, a fox, and a bird; and to Thomas Thwaites, for creating prosthetic extensions of his limbs that allowed him to move in the manner of, and spend time roaming hills in the company of, goats.
Literature Prize - Fredrik Sjoberg, for his three-volume autobiographical work about the pleasures of collecting flies that are dead, and flies that are not yet dead.
Perception Prize - Atsuki Higashiyama and Kohei Adachi, for investigating whether things look different when you bend over and view them between your legs.
Fell down a lift shaft....I'm more surprised he was able to get to 88mph, on what I assume to be an unmodified DeLorean. How did he do it? Was the road on a slope or something? Or a cliff?
It was around 330m....Must've been one long-ass shaft.![]()
The article reads as 100% Onion-like satire, but has been plonked among standard news articles as far as I can tell. Questioning my whimsy-detector, I can't help but think back to this recent exchange......The atlas of dirty place names (Australian edition):
http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-26/horny-point-clean-up-map-of-australia/7871090
The explosion happened in a bin, so with that in mind:
So it's entirely possible that somebody threw a pressure cooker away. Some kind of fluid dropped into it, and then someone else threw an old phone away. The battery corroded, dripped into the pressure cooker, and everything reacted explosively.
- Samsung have been in the news of late because the Galaxy S7 series have been spontaneously bursting into flame.
- A pressure cooker with wires coming out of it sounds suspicious, but it's an electrical appliance, so of course it's going to have wires.
- People throw all sorts of things away, including things that they shouldn't.
Has the ABC written a "serious" article so ridiculous that it's this readily mistakable as satire? Do you find it funny? If so, is it the first layer, or second layer, or both, that you find funny? I'm struggling to keep up. What with genuine satire in places being done so convincingly, and attempts at the genuinely serious being more farcical than the satire, I'm a bit lost.I can't tell if that was brilliant sarcasm or an actual theory.
It's intended as humour, but those are actual places names. Case in point, Tittybong.The article reads as 100% Onion-like satire, but has been plonked among standard news articles as far as I can tell.
...Jane Doe I, II, and III sue Louisiana state for their right to perform pole dancing, citing the First Amendment and gender discrimination.
Worlds coolest/ dumbest dad,
http://www.9news.com.au/national/20...and-five-year-old-does-burnouts-as-dad-cheers
It was on a private road so police cant do anything.
As in this country a 8 year old can drive a car on private property.
And no point in DOCS getting involved, they're inept as is.
Not the article itself, but the fact that Daily Mail used a laughing "emoji" when referencing the article, I'm assuming.How is that article funny
Yes.Not the article itself, but the fact that Daily Mail used a laughing "emoji" when referencing the article, I'm assuming.
No, it's not a crying face.