-
The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Tom Hanks Lives On!!!
- Thread starter jake_fink
- Start date
Marc Chevalier
Gone Home
- Messages
- 18,192
- Location
- Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Really? REALLY??? How come CNN hasn't said a word?
.
.
MrBern
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 4,469
is this a hoax?
Global associated News, I think thats a hoax news site.
Global associated News, I think thats a hoax news site.
Marc Chevalier
Gone Home
- Messages
- 18,192
- Location
- Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
Fake, then. Not even Fox News is reporting it.
.
.
Fletch
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 8,865
- Location
- Iowa - The Land That Stuff Forgot
Yahoo News has zip, CNN.com has zilch.
I conclude that Mr. Hanks has not, in fact, fallen off anything.
I conclude that Mr. Hanks has not, in fact, fallen off anything.
Marc Chevalier
Gone Home
- Messages
- 18,192
- Location
- Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
He could be off the wagon, or even off his rocker -- but he ain't off a cliff.
.
.
Absinthe_1900
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,628
- Location
- The Heights in Houston TX
That's what his stunt double gets paid for.:eusa_doh:
Marc Chevalier
Gone Home
- Messages
- 18,192
- Location
- Los Feliz, Los Angeles, California
If it comes to that, yes. Tom's worth more to the movie than the stunt double is.
.
.
Featured products
-
John Lofgren Monkey Boots Shinki Horsebuttt - $1,136 The classic monkey boot silhouette in an incredibly rich Shinki russet horse leather. -
Grant Stone Diesel Boot Dark Olive Chromexcel - $395 Goodyear welted, Horween Chromexcel, classic good looks. -
Schott 568 Vandals Jacket - $1,250 The classic Perfecto motorcycle jacket, in a very special limited-edition Schott double rider style.
Harp
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 8,508
- Location
- Chicago, IL US
Fall
The Da Vinci Hoax.
The Da Vinci Hoax.
Absinthe_1900
One Too Many
- Messages
- 1,628
- Location
- The Heights in Houston TX
Marc Chevalier said:
Correct!, Just ask the insurance company underwriting a film.
Maj.Nick Danger
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 4,469
- Location
- Behind the 8 ball,..
Sounds like that movie he did.
"Joe Versus the Volcano".
"Joe Versus the Volcano".
Jay
Practically Family
- Messages
- 920
- Location
- New Jersey
Well that certainly scared me for a spell. He's one of the last few respectable actors. In his age group at least.
MrBern
I'll Lock Up
- Messages
- 4,469
the source
This is a good lesson that you cant believe everything you read.
Anyone can write anything on the internet, so stick to reputable news services. You only have to click on the icon for this "global" news to see its intentions are dubious.
This is a good lesson that you cant believe everything you read.
Anyone can write anything on the internet, so stick to reputable news services. You only have to click on the icon for this "global" news to see its intentions are dubious.
Jay
Practically Family
- Messages
- 920
- Location
- New Jersey
Indeed. Wikipedia is the same way. The downside is their format gives you information on darn near everything known to man.
Slicksuit
One of the Regulars
- Messages
- 239
- Location
- Suburban Detroit, Michigan
Wikipedia is generally good
When compared to its closest counterpart, Encyclopedia Bittannica, Wikipedia fares just as well, at least according to a study published in Nature (Dec.'05). Peer-reviewed publication will always be the gold-standard for academic research.
Wikipedia works by virture of the sheer number of eyes that are on the site. Mistakes are generally corrected within hours. As with any published work, the reader should consider the source, and strive for objectivity. As with history texts, bias can have an influence even on encyclopedias. I particularly love Wikipedia for its coverage of pop-culture content and less popular 'niche' topics. It is a good starting point, but by no means a definitive and exhaustive work.
When compared to its closest counterpart, Encyclopedia Bittannica, Wikipedia fares just as well, at least according to a study published in Nature (Dec.'05). Peer-reviewed publication will always be the gold-standard for academic research.
Wikipedia works by virture of the sheer number of eyes that are on the site. Mistakes are generally corrected within hours. As with any published work, the reader should consider the source, and strive for objectivity. As with history texts, bias can have an influence even on encyclopedias. I particularly love Wikipedia for its coverage of pop-culture content and less popular 'niche' topics. It is a good starting point, but by no means a definitive and exhaustive work.
Similar threads
