Welcome to our first ever Mail Bag! We are proud to say that we didn’t have to make any questions up, as we thought we might have to from lack of participation. Hopefully next week we’ll get a bigger turn out. At any rate. Here we go.
PJ inquires—
How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
First thing I want to know is who made up this question in the first place? I feel like this question first came to life in some hole in the wall bar in Montana from a grizzled drunk old guy trying to pick up some ladies. Can’t you hear it “Heeeyyy, I got a question (hiccup) HOW mUch wood…(pauses for thought) could a WOODCHUCK chuck iF a woodC(hiccup)ck could chuck…(another pause) wood?” then gives a wink, half smiles, and falls asleep. For arguments sake, let’s say a woodchuck could chuck wood. It’s really subjective to the size of wood being chucked right?
Look at a woodchucks arms… it could barely hold up one of those delicious hard ciders it works so hard to make. While they may be tiny, they are known to move 700lbs of dirt when digging their burrows. 700lbs!!! That’s basically the mom from What’s Eating Gilbert Grape plus another 175 pounds. Stamina is definitely on their side I would say. So if they were chucking twigs or even small branches, and let’s say those twigs averaged 0.5 pounds each, I would estimate they could chuck about 1275 pieces of wood. I say that much just because I’m sure it would need a break to eat some nuts or something and eventually just getting bored of throwing wood. SO there, now you know. -Cody
Shane writes —
Just tossing this out there, but with the internet and kids in general being much more informed, will it be harder to make a successful sci-fi movie about involving elements from our solar system…ie…life on Mars.
Great question.
It depends on how you like your science-fiction. Are we talking Star Trek or Star Wars? Star Trek thrives in a scientifically driven universe, while Star Wars couldn’t give two bantha poodoo’s whether or not something is possible, but both of those series are well received.
I think sci-fi works best as a setting, not a classroom. For the most part people are willing to get over the writer’s throw away science jargon as long as the story is enjoyable. For instance, Red Planet wasn’t a good movie because the story was awful. If the story was halfway decent people probably would have been more willing to believe a robotic hellhound would chase an on-his-way out Val Kilmer across the face of Mars.
Ultimately, if a child wants to be engaged in a particular story he/she will be. If they want to spend their time pointing out all the impossibilities in a story then they will be hard-pressed to find any fictional story enjoyable since reality is almost always exaggerated for entertainment purposes. -Cam
Nathan writes –
Instead of Batman vs. Superman, what about a tag team match between Bats/Supes vs. Iron Man/Thor – who would win?
The answer to this question was thrown around by several 4LN team members… it took a lot of thought, but here goes.
The two teams are almost identical to each other: Superman and Thor are both heavyweights with few weaknesses and way too much power, and Batman and Iron Man both rely on their brains (and excessive wealth) to become powerful.
Superman’s main problem is that one of his weaknesses is magic, and after a lengthy discussion on whether or not Thor uses magic to control magic as opposed to conjuring magical lightning, we think that this could pose a problem for Supes. In Kingdom Come, Shazam uses lightning to beat Superman to within an inch of his life, and is only stopped by a bit of trickery on Superman’s part. Thor would probably use the same tactic, and he wouldn’t be beaten by turning him into an 8 year old like Shazam was.
Thor, on the other hand, is far more mortal than Superman. He isn’t nearly as overpowered is Supes, and has far more weaknesses. This fight would devolve into a knockdown drag out brawl probably ending similarly to Superman: Doomsday, in that they would just beat each other into oblivion.
This leaves us with Batman and Iron Man. Iron Man definitely has the better tech, but we still see Batman coming out on top because of his self-mastery. Tony Stark is incredibly arrogant and thinks he will always come out on top because of how awesome he is. Batman is a master tactician who would use Tony’s arrogance against him.
Arrogance is really Thor’s major problem in this battle too. His arrogance would get the better of him. Superman and Batman are a lot more level headed, which would allow them to come out on top.
Quick sidenote: not all of us here at 4LN agree that Batman would beat Iron Man. Bill (who surprisngly hates Iron Man) feels that Stark’s technology is just too much for Batman to overcome.
Final Consensus: Superman and Batman, with Batman as the last man standing. -Cam, Cody, Stephen, and Bill
Well that’s it for this weeks mailbag. Send us your questions for next week. –4LN Crew