Jokes and Riddles
Tickle your brain! Laugh and have some fun! If you know a great, non-offensive joke or riddle, this is the place for it!
Asked in Jokes and Riddles, Tongue Twisters
How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
This is an American English language tongue-twister that is used to train children to master speech, set in a fun rhyme of alike sounding words. The answer given within the tongue twister is: "A woodchuck would chuck all the wood he could if a woodchuck could chuck wood." NOTE: In real life, Woodchucks (groundhogs) do NOT really chuck wood. Read below for some humorous answers to this perplexing tongue twister. Woodchucks Chucking Wood The amount of wood that woodchucks would chuck on a given day varies greatly with the individual woodchuck. According to a Wall Street Journal article, New York State wildlife expert Richard Thomas found that a woodchuck could chuck around 35 cubic feet of dirt in the course of digging a burrow. Thomas reasoned that if a woodchuck could chuck wood, he would chuck an amount equal to 700 pounds. Some say it depends on three factors: The woodchuck's desire to chuck said wood. The woodchuck's need to chuck the aforementioned wood. The woodchuck's ability to chuck the wood when it is a woodchuck Others say: The woodchuck could chuck as much wood as he wanted! "Sixteen and 1/2 board feet a day- except on Groundhog's Day since groundhog is another name for woodchuck."- This answer is according to no less an authority than the 'Junior Woodchucks Guidebook', a publication often consulted by Huey, Dewey, and Louie Duck and referred to yet again by them in answering this very same question. How Chuck Norris got involved-A woodchuck would only chuck as much would as Chuck Norris would allow it to, because the woodchuck shares Chuck's name. Therefore, Chuck must punish it and make it chuck as much wood as Chuck can. So, a woodchuck would chuck as much wood as Chuck could. None because a wood chuck cannot chuck wood! Approximately 3.9675 pounds every 5.6843 seconds. So there. 2.865 lbs every 11.3686 Seconds? As much as he needed to be satisfied. It could chuck a lot. But it definitely couldn't chuck Chuck Norris. A group of people actually did a study on this. None of the woodchucks ate any wood planks so they never upchucked it but some of them chucked them (threw them) at people. During my study of Woodchuck I came to the conclusion that woodchucks don't chuck wood but only drink beer. However, this beer can frequently motivate them towards actions that can closely resemble the chucking of wood. A woodchuck will only chuck certain wood, likely that which is found in their natural, prairie habitat. Therefore, the lack of trees on the prairie is quite closely related to the chucking of wood performed by these wood-chucking woodchucks. Since it is the same animal as the Groundhog, should we not instead ask : how much ground would a groundhog hog if a groundhog would hog ground. The above is pretty goood, but I think that the groundhog would be hogging sod. 315g. This was an estimate done in a book of useless trivia. A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck - if a woodchuck could chuck wood. About as many good cookies a good cook could cook, if a good cook could cook cookies good. About as many boards as the bored Mongol hordes would hoard if the bored Mongol hordes did hoard boards in gourds. He would chuck, he would, as much as he could, he would, if a woodchuck could chuck wood. If he could chuck wood, the woodchuck would chuck as much as he could! If a woodchuck could chuck wood, he would and should chuck wood. But if woodchucks can't chuck wood, they shouldn't and wouldn't chuck wood. Though were I a woodchuck, and I chucked wood, I would chuck wood with the best woodchucks that chucked wood. If a woodchuck could chuck wood, then s/he'd chuck all the wood, s/he'd chuck and chuck and chuck and chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood. It would chuck the amount of wood equal to the seashells that sweet Suzy Shoreham sells by the seashore divided by how many primary pickled peppers Peter Piper picks. One quarter of a sycamore if you give him a quarter for every quarter of the sycamore he cut. It might depend on how many female woodchucks were present. Or, it could depend on whether the woodchuck's mother-in-law was around or not. If she was, he'd be chucking all day. If not, he'd be watching the football game. Some maintain that woodchucks could not and would not chuck wood at all. It depends on how good his dentures are! A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood. But unfortunately, woodchucks do not chuck wood. About 5.72 fluid litres of wood About as many boards as the Mongol hoards would hoard if the Mongol hordes did hoard boards. Tons. More than you can count. Honestly. No one can chuck more would than a woodchuck. If the woodchuck's name was Maurice, then it could chuck all the wood that it wants to. However, if its name is Frank, no chucking would be for it. Due to the average size of a woodchuck and the general density of wood (not including cork [which is actually bark]) if a woodchuck could chuck wood it would probably get through about 6.573 pounds per day, assuming the woodchuck is functioning correctly. Using the formula: (W + I) * C where W = the constant of wood, which is well known to be 61, as agreed in many scientific circles. I = the variable in this equation, and stands for the word "if" from the original problem. As there are three circumstances, with 0 equaling the chance that the woodchuck cannot chuck wood, 1 being the theory that the woodchuck can chuck wood but chooses not to, and 2 standing for the probability that the woodchuck can and will chuck wood, we clearly must choose 2 for use in this equation. C = the constant of Chuck Norris, whose presence in any problem involving the word chuck must there, is well known to equal 1.1 of any known being, therefore the final part of this calculation is 1.1. As is clear, this appears to give the answer of (61 + 2) * 1.1 = (63) * 1.1 = 69.3. However, Chuck Norris' awesome roundhouse kick declares that all decimal points cannot be used in formulas such as this, and so it must be rounded to the final solution of 69 units of wood. A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as a woodchuck could chuck until Chuck Norris got there. As much wood as a wood chuck could chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood. Here are more answers from our members: Oddly enough, this is just one of many oral exercises employed by auctioneers. Using a sing-song method of delivery, varying the syllabic emphasis, and testing themselves to see how many times the question and answer can be repeated in one breath while being heard and understood by an audience, is how they hone their harmonic skill. Woodchucks can't chuck wood and they were only named that because the English men who found it could not pronounce the Indian version and settled for this. But if woodchucks could they would probably chuck about 700 pounds of it (true scientific evidence backs this up). A woodchuck would chuck ALL of the wood if a woodchuck could chuck wood! Well assuming its a fairly large woodchuck and its early adulthood, he would be able to chuck about 90-110 pounds of wood an hour. Actually, it is more likely that global warming or the volcano located at Yellowstone will kill us all before a woodchuck could chuck wood. This depends on several decisive factors: 1. The size of the woodchuck in question. 2. The density of the wood. 3. The position function of the woodchuck [f(w)] in relation to the wood [w]. 4. The velocity [v=f'(w)] and acceleration [a=dv/dw; or a= f"(w)] with respect to the woodchuck and the chucking. 5. Given an interval [t], integrate the function [f(w)] allowing for [a] and [v]. There you have it, the area under the curve. (I.E. HOW MUCH A WOOD A WOODCHUCK CAN CHUCK). He would chuck, he would, as much as he could, and chuck as much wood as a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood. Could "chuck wood"??? ...as much as you give him greedy lil critter!!!
Asked in Jokes and Riddles, Weight and Mass
How many grams are in a kilogram?
Asked by Walter Carter in Jokes and Riddles, Word Games
Would you rather be able to detect any lie you hear or get away with any lie you told?
Asked in Miley Cyrus, Jokes and Riddles
Sally's birthday is on July 9 Billy's birthday is two weeks later Billy's party is three days after his birthday When is Billy's party?
Asked in Jokes and Riddles
What occurs once in every minute twice in every moment yet never in a thousand years?
2 guardians one gate to hell and one to heaven. How can find gate to heaven by asking only one question?
I have seen similar questions; the assumption is that one will always tell the truth, the other will always lie. The question can either be: "What would the other guardian say if I asked which was the way to heaven", or "What would you say if I asked you which was the way to heaven", or some variation. -- There simply is no guardians or gates written in the KJV text which I am aware of that related to souls access to heaven. In Revelation 20 it is written," and I saw the dead small and great stand before God and the books were opened and another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works. ... and they were judged even man according to their works. And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire. Verses concerning your soul returning to our Father upon your death are written in Ecclesiastes 12:7: Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was: and the spirit shall return unto God who gave it. Luke 16 defines a condition for those returning souls who are not in good standing according to their works. -- It is not you who asked any questions permmiting you to enter through the gates of heaven, but it is you who are asked questions by the sentinals who guard the gates. You have to justify yourself as being worthy to make entry through these royal portals. Right answers to the questions asked permit you to stand on the right hand of God with His sheep or on His left with the goats. All are permitted to go to the spirit world without any questions being asked of us. But not to the kingdom where God resides. Remember when we are eventually asked questions we cannot lie our way into heaven, for all our doing are known to God.
How much was a loaf of Brad in 1975?
$8,710.72 To find the answer, we must first quantify the value of Brad. So how much is a human life worth? According to research by Stanford economists, a year of human life is worth about $129,000. Wolfram Alpha tells us that the average age of a person named Brad is 35 years, and that the average life expectancy for a human male (worldwide) is about 69 years. Assuming that procuring a loaf of Brad involves cutting down a Brad in his prime, we would be depriving him of 34 years of life - a value of $4,386,000. Next we must decide if a "loaf" is a unit of volume, or a unit of weight. In the UK, government regulation defines a loaf by weight: 400 grams is a "small" loaf, and 800 grams is a "large" loaf. So let's go with weight, and let's split the difference and assume that we want a medium sized loaf of Brad... that's 600 grams, or about 1.3 pounds. Since the average weight of a human male is 166 pounds (according to Wolfram Alpha), we can assume that Brad should sell for about $26,421 per pound - which, using our previous loaf weight of 1.3 pounds, sets the price for a loaf of Brad in 2010 at $34,348. Finally, inflation must be factored in. According to an inflation calculator at westegg.com, what cost $34,348 in 2009 would have cost $8,710.72 in 1975. Thus, it is safe to say that a loaf of Brad in 1975 could be purchased for $8,710.72. Additional answers from our users: Typical of this site, the answer above is very US-centric, when there is no indication in the question as to where the 1975 Brad was to be purchased. Brad - in 1975 - was a rarity in Ireland, and research in the vaults of the Natural History Museum, cross-referenced with the data from the Irish maternity hospitals, show that a loaf of baby-Brad was retailing at £459.25. However, as the questioner has not specified if the Brad in question is an adult or a child, we need to cross-reference again, this time with the League of Irish Undertakers. Their files tell us that - at death - the average Brad cost £2,749.37. Therefore, the answer to the question depends on how mature the Brad in question is required to be. The maturity/price is a sliding scale. This answer - obviously - only applies to Irish Brads. When Ireland joined the European Monetary Union, it became illegal to trade in male humans for fun or profit. Priceless! - not the loaf, the question! And a final word of apology to Brad for any inference that he is a loafer. One Pitt without a Jolly (1975). We would need to know when in 1975 the loaf of Brad was to be purchased, and where. We would also need to know the number of Brads available at the time of purchase. For example, if the last loaf of Brad were to be purchased from a Brad the day before, we must assume the price of a loaf of Brad would go up (according to the laws of supply and demand). From here, there are a few possibilities: The supply of Brads just dropped, and the demand for a loaf of Brad stays the same. The supply of Brads just dropped, but so does the demand, as one family now has a loaf of Brad. It is very difficult to determine the exact price, so just assume that when you travel back in time to acquire this loaf of Brad you'll need (at the very least) $8,710.72. When you return, please tell us how much you had to pay. Buy it at the most available store, so we can get the general retail price. (If you would like to know the answer to the question "How much was a loaf of bread in 1975?", click on the Related Question below.)
An angry elderly woman had twelve toothpicks in front of her She threw one away Now she had nine in front of her How is this possible?
湖北体彩app © 湖北体彩app Multiply Media, LLC. All Rights Reserved. The material on this site can not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, cached or otherwise used, except with prior written permission of Multiply.