Saturday, May 07, 2005

From the Really Bad Ideas File. . . .

NegativeMode Update (5.8.05): The link to the story below is not longer working. The main reason is because the story that it linked to was not really a BBC news story, but rather a web page created by a UVA student (the comments to this post explain in greater detail thanks to DJ Skuggs). I'll leave this post up, because it presents an interesting question still open for debate: Could 40 unarmed midgets really defeat one full-grown, enraged, African lion? Discuss. . . .

When the president of the Cambodian Midget Fighting League ("CMFL") received an angry complaint from a disgruntled fan, he did something about it. The CMFL president had advertised that his midget fighters would "take on anything; man, beast or machine." The angry fan, wanting to prove him wrong, disputed whether or not his tiny-42 person fighting force could take on a full-grown african lion. The CMFL president, not one to back down from a challenge, feeling that as his fighters had a 42-1 advantage, they could out-wit and out-muscle the lion. Boy was he wrong (fake story/webpage here).

The fight took place in the coliseum of Cambodian city Kâmpóng Chhnãng. The fight sold out three weeks in advance, and was sanctioned by the Cambodian government (as long as they got 50% commission on ticket sales). The result of the fight?
The fight was called in only 12 minutes, after which 28 fighters were declared dead, while the other 14 suffered severe injuries including broken bones and lost limbs, rendering them unable to fight back.
Sounds like the lion won. Obviously, I could go into quite a bit of detail as to why this fight was wrong on about 15 levels (animal cruelty, midget cruetly, people paying to watch, government sanction, etc.), but I think that's pretty obvious. What I find more interesting is why these little people chose to fight a lion. Were they not aware what a lion is? Maybe in Cambodian, the word for '"lion" and "kitten" are the same. Personally, I'm not getting in the ring with a lion with 42 of my largest friends, let alone 42 midgets. A lion will eff you up. I mean, even if you think you're going to win, at least a few people are going to catch the lions wrath. I'll end with this understatement: it was a poorly conceived idea. . . .

On a completely unrelated topic: As NegativeMode has been trying to keep you all abreast of the various minor holidays that have been occuring over the past few days, today's holiday is . . . National Haiku Day (the date is 5/7/5, get it?). Go write a haiku, you know you want to.

11 comments:

dj skuggs said...

the great lion roared
as the brave midgets attacked
and died tiny deaths.

dj skuggs said...

i was sufficiently disturbed by that story to try to find out more. it seems a bit suspicious, not only because it's hard to imagine people being that stupid, but also because a google search turns up no references whatsoever to the cambodian midget fighting league and the link points you to a university of virginia student website. is negativemode spreading misinformation? is today even haiku day?

NegativeMode said...

First off, excellent haiku. That was really very funny. Second, good spot on the search/UVA website. NegativeMode was well aware of the lack of google results and the fact that it was a UVA website. NegativeMode did the same reasearch as you and came to the same questionable conclusions. I decided to post it anyway. Oh, it is haiku day though....

NegativeMode said...

I just emailed the BBC to confirm the accuracy of the midgets fighting lions story. I'll let you all know if/when they get back to me.

Potential fake news,
Lion mangles wee small men,
BBC reply...

dj skuggs said...

if you click on the link to the lion story now, the website contains an admission that the story was a hoax.

the post states that the story was "created to 'settle' a dispute betwen a friend of mine in which he claimed that 40 weaponless midgets could defeat 1 lion." he goes on to add, "The argument was in fact settled once he read and believed the article." which raises the question, didn't this guy think it a little odd that the events precisely matched the contested hypothetical? i thought uva kids were supposed to be smart, but i guess smart does not necessarily mean not gullible.

in any case, the post invites readers to email their predictions of who would win the hypothetical battle to lionvs40midgets@yahoo.com.

Anonymous said...

are the midgets armed in anyway?

Spears and they've got a shot...guns...uh yeah definitely more than a shot...nothing..well they'll make nice little "small" meals for the lion.

NegativeMode said...

Good work DJ Skuggs, glad you were able to get to the bottom of this. You have not, however, answered said hypothetical: Who would win the fight?

As the story proved, it is totally believable that a lion was able to kill 28 midgets, and severly wound most of them. A lion must outweigh a midget by several hundred pounds. Also, for midgets to fight a lion without any weapons, they would have to get within a foot of the lion. I don't care how many midgets there are, at least half of them, if not more, are going down. Interesting question, but ultimately, I think the lion wins....

Anyone else's thoughts?

Anonymous said...

The lion has weapons he was born with aka:claws & lots of serious teeth that evolved for the single purpose of being able to kill and devour prey.

The midgets have not evolved any natural weapons. So without any man-made weapons, midgets lose.

dj skuggs said...

i'm going with the lion. i don't see how enough midgets can get close enough to subdue the lion. all 40 can't fight the lion at once. there's just not enough room, even for little people.

sinoway said...

Midgets wedged between
Powerful crushing molars
Lion needs to floss

PositiveMode said...

Two midgets run in
Lion takes ninja sidestep
They hit each other