FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[darwin dali]

Just a thought: technically, this is the Anything Else section, so F1 related questions wouldn't be what I expect here

[overboost]

The correct answer has been split into 10 units, therefore a correct response would be one that succesfully attempts 10 units and a would have a response that sets out to fail by not addressing all 10 of the required units

Huh? It says 'bonus' question. So optional obviously!

So am I right or not?!

Thanks.

[CookinFlat6]

Just a thought: technically, this is the Anything Else section, so F1 related questions wouldn't be what I expect here

The term 'anything else' is a paradox if meant to convey the message that F1 is mutually exclusive to anything else. I.e 'anything but F1' would be correct as F1 is still a subset of anything

Yup the exclusion would have to be definned - therefore a seperate set - otherwise where do you draw the line - anything but racing? cars? Grand prix?, general chat?, pointless arguments?

Its implied tho and thats fair enough, anyways noones gonna get the F1 question anyway

[CookinFlat6]

The correct answer has been split into 10 units, therefore a correct response would be one that succesfully attempts 10 units and a would have a response that sets out to fail by not addressing all 10 of the required units

Huh? It says 'bonus' question. So optional obviously!

So am I right or not?!

Thanks.

Why would anyone not want the bonus

Anyway you are close enough - 8 out of 63 times, a driver has won the WDC without having the benefit of a team good enough to win the WCC. The biggest statistical evidence that F1 success is not ALWAYS about having the bestcar

[sagi58]

Just a thought: technically, this is the Anything Else section, so F1 related questions wouldn't be what I expect here

Maybe we need an F1 Trivia thread?

[overboost]

The correct answer has been split into 10 units, therefore a correct response would be one that succesfully attempts 10 units and a would have a response that sets out to fail by not addressing all 10 of the required units

Huh? It says 'bonus' question. So optional obviously!

So am I right or not?!

Thanks.

Why would anyone not want the bonus

Anyway you are close enough - 8 out of 63 times, a driver has won the WDC without having the benefit of a team good enough to win the WCC. The biggest statistical evidence that F1 success is not ALWAYS about having the bestcar

Ahhh. But then you have missed Raikkonen on your list. McLaren only lost the wcc that year due to the Alonso/Hamilton Hungary penalty, well and then having all their wcc points stripped.

Bonus questions are fine if you know the answer!

[Hammer278]

The correct answer has been split into 10 units, therefore a correct response would be one that succesfully attempts 10 units and a would have a response that sets out to fail by not addressing all 10 of the required units

Huh? It says 'bonus' question. So optional obviously!

So am I right or not?!

Thanks.

Why would anyone not want the bonus

Anyway you are close enough - 8 out of 63 times, a driver has won the WDC without having the benefit of a team good enough to win the WCC. The biggest statistical evidence that F1 success is not ALWAYS about having the bestcar

Ahhh. But then you have missed Raikkonen on your list. McLaren only lost the wcc that year due to the Alonso/Hamilton Hungary penalty, well and then having all their wcc points stripped.

Bonus questions are fine if you know the answer!

Boosty, that mush between your ears is not there simply to fill up your skull, its used for thinking too.

Please THINK before making these statements. McLaren had intel on Ferrari secrets (due to Ferrari employees' idiocy) and thus had the advantage of improving their machinery to match Ferrari. However, due to Alonso and Hamilton getting penalized here and there, this also helped Kimi with his driver points, did it not? Or are you going to say it did not contribute to Kimi's performance.

The end result is the end result - McLaren had 0 WCC points that year due to various circumstances. The question is about answering based on facts, it doesn't require your bias and other ingredients to jump in to distort a simple answer.

[CookinFlat6]

Boosty, that mush between your ears is not there simply to fill up your skull, its used for thinking too.

Please THINK before making these statements. McLaren had intel on Ferrari secrets (due to Ferrari employees' idiocy) and thus had the advantage of improving their machinery to match Ferrari. However, due to Alonso and Hamilton getting penalized here and there, this also helped Kimi with his driver points, did it not? Or are you going to say it did not contribute to Kimi's performance.

The end result is the end result - McLaren had 0 WCC points that year due to various circumstances. The question is about answering based on facts, it doesn't require your bias and other ingredients to jump in to distort a simple answer.

He is so full of the "mush" that its starting to leak out of his bottom. Why would anyone boycott an actual fact with their own biased opinion - actually, that easy to answer

[overboost]

Boosty, that mush between your ears is not there simply to fill up your skull, its used for thinking too.

Please THINK before making these statements. McLaren had intel on Ferrari secrets (due to Ferrari employees' idiocy) and thus had the advantage of improving their machinery to match Ferrari. However, due to Alonso and Hamilton getting penalized here and there, this also helped Kimi with his driver points, did it not? Or are you going to say it did not contribute to Kimi's performance.

The end result is the end result - McLaren had 0 WCC points that year due to various circumstances. The question is about answering based on facts, it doesn't require your bias and other ingredients to jump in to distort a simple answer.

Huh? Ok! Yes I agree the Ferrari intel (including Kimi's pitstop strategies!) definitely improved the performance of McLaren but this had the effect of awarding more points to the McLaren drivers and to the team and taking points away from Kimi. Taking into account the team penalty in Hungary the wcc points McLaren scored in 2007 were enough to win them the wcc. So on the track the McLaren was the strongest car, it is though technically true that in the stats book it didn't exist.

My point is that Kimi wasn't racing ghosts, the stronger McLaren was there which is a fact! This puts Kimi on the list.

Ps. Kimi's nor Hamilton nor Alonso's wdc totals were affected by the stripping of the Hungary wcc points. They were wcc points only!

[overboost]

New question!

Where is the world's oldest known temple complete with architectural monuments located and what is its approximate age?

[CookinFlat6]

thats 2 questions and is hardly trivia when its not a fact and is open to intepretation. Different people will have different answers. Architectural monument? what does that even mean? do you mean surviving human made feature? Whose definition of temple?

Whats hard to understand about Trivia.Fact - trivial - not a matter of life and death, fact - proven undisputed fact

this could be anywhere from Serbia to Southern Africa to China - all places that have all discovered the oldest pyramids/temples/shrines at some point or the other

Maybe you should have stuck to a fact about Christian Horners wedding or something you know about

[overboost]

thats 2 questions and is hardly trivia when its not a fact and is open to intepretation. Different people will have different answers. Architectural monument? what does that even mean? do you mean surviving human made feature? Whose definition of temple?

Whats hard to understand about Trivia.Fact - trivial - not a matter of life and death, fact - proven undisputed fact

this could be anywhere from Serbia to Southern Africa to China - all places that have all discovered the oldest pyramids/temples/shrines at some point or the other

Maybe you should have stuck to a fact about Christian Horners wedding or something you know about

Yes, human made feature(s) and it does contain a temple. It is the oldest known and radio-carbon dated!

Your area does include this site. You just need to narrow it down a bit.

[CookinFlat6]

Serbia then

[darwin dali]

Probably in Mesopotamia, i.e., Iraq, Syria, Southern Turkey, thereabouts where agriculture and the concept of settlements started out some 10000 years ago.

[overboost]

Probably in Mesopotamia, i.e., Iraq, Syria, Southern Turkey, thereabouts where agriculture and the concept of settlements started out some 10000 years ago.

Very close on location, the site is in one of those countries. Older though, a hunter gatherer society pre-agriculture!