| A: | This message includes a tip to help avoid spreading viruses. Since many viruses automatically e-mail themselves to people in your address book, create a new entry that will foil the attempt. Give the new entry the name of !0000 and do not put any e-mail address in the entry.
While this is not really a hoax, its effectiveness is questionable. Many viruses (worms) will send themselves to any e-mail address found in the address book, regardless of whether there are also invalid entries. Also, some worms, such as SirCam, have their own e-mail software included, so they will not be using your e-mail program or be hindered by any of its error detection or messages.
There is no substitute for using an updated antivirus program, and for practicing safe computing. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one tells the story of how a young girl dialed #77 on her cell phone to call the police and foil a rapist posing as a policeman. A new version of this urban legend has the girl calling *677 (or *77).
In some states, special numbers on a cell phone will immediately connect you to that state's highway patrol. That code is not universal, however. In fact, #77 only works in two states (as of June 2003). Other states use *55, *47, or *HP, and some don't have any special code at all. Rather than frantically trying to figure out which one, if any, will work, just dial 911 directly.
Whether this particular tale is true or not, women driving alone have been sexually assaulted by rapists pretending to be police officers, so the advice it gives (to not pull over in deserted areas when signaled to do so by an unmarked police vehicle) is well worth heeding. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This e-mail warns never to call area code 809 because you will get charged an exorbitant amount of money for the call. It goes on to describe various ways in which scam artists are tricking people into returning their calls, then charging outrageous fees for making the call. Earlier versions of this message credited AT&T, but the latest permutation mentions Verizon as the source. Also, in keeping with changing times, the original message said that the scammers were in the Virgin Islands. The location has now been changed to the Carribean in general, and two other area codes have been added to the e-mail.
This is a hoax message that describes a real scam. It was ripped off from a 1996 ScamBusters report and revised through the years with lots of added errors. All of the prefixes in area code 809 are in the Caribbean country of the Dominican Republic, not the British Virgin Islands as stated in the original warning messages. You don't need to completely avoid calling area 809, especially if you know who you are calling. AT&T says there are international long distance charges for calling 809 numbers, but not excessive charges for normal calls.
Not every phone number in the 809 area code is part of this scam, most are ordinary, legitimate phone numbers. The problem is that there are scam artists within area code 809 who trick people into returning calls to phone numbers that are set up to charge a fee, and that's where the risk of the higher charges becomes a problem. These numbers are similar to 900 numbers in the U.S., which often charge very high per-minute fees.
The bottom line, according to AT&T, is that if you get an unusual message via e-mail, pager, or voice mail, to return a call to an unfamiliar area code about an overdue bill or that you've won a contest, be wary. Check the area code first to see if you are making an international call. Most calls to other countries require "011" to be dialed first, but not calls to the Caribbean, which has area codes such as 809, 284 and 876. It's easy to think they are just unfamiliar U.S. area codes.
You can read about more telephone scams HERE, and specifically about the 809 scam HERE. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This warning states that scammers can dupe telephone customers into making long-distance phone calls for them by posing as phone company employees and asking the called parties to press the 9, 0, and # keys and then hang up.
Is this scam possible? Technically, yes. But this trick only works with business phone systems or switchboards where pressing 9 is the signal to obtain an outside line, and where there are no restrictions placed on outgoing calls. Residential phones are not affected.
A new version of this story builds on the original and tries to apply the exact same scam to mobile phones. It states that dialing #90 will allow crooks to access the "SIM" card in cell phones and make calls at the victim's expense. This one is totally bogus.
AT&T also wants everybody to know that its technicians do not ask customers to participate in repairing or testing the phones, so anybody who makes this kind of request should be suspect.
Click HERE to see what AT&T has to say about this scam. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This piece of e-poop states that the brass at ABC News issued orders yesterday forbidding reporters from wearing American flag lapel pins, or any other patriotic insignia.
It is often said that everything old is new again. Such is the case with this regurgitated story from 2001 (not yesterday as stated in that e-mail).
It is true that after the attack on September 11, 2001, ABC, along with many other media outlets, recommended that their on-air personalities not wear patriotic jewelry or clothing of any kind (not just flag pins). The reason for that was not to denigrate the image of the flag or promote some anti-patriotic agenda, but rather to maintain an image of impartiality. Even Tom Brokaw (NBC) decided not to wear an American flag lapel pin on TV. Although some news outlets have been accused of political favoritism, news people generally try to gain their viewer's trust by avoiding personal or partisan displays while reporting the news.
This old e-mail has probably been resurrected because of the Obama/flag-pin controversy. It was alleged by some rabid anti-Obama folk that he was not patriotic just because he sometimes chose not to wear a pin. That allegation, of course, is pure hogwash. And somewhat sexist, too, because Hillary Clinton has been photographed innumerable times not wearing a flag pin (particularly during their televised debates), and no one seemed to much care about that. John McCain doesn't always wear a flag pin, and no one questions his patriotism.
A few months ago, Bob Schieffer (CBS News) editorialized about whether wearing a flag pin makes one a better patriot than someone that does not wear a pin. The obvious answer there is, of course it does not (a terrorist could wear a flag pin). He said that he thought that it was a nice thing if people wanted to wear a flag on their lapel. He said that it was more important to "keep the flag behind our lapel - in our hearts." He also said that he feels the same way about wearing his religion on his sleeve: "It fits better for me on the inside." As Schieffer put it, "Patriotism is no more about signs or pins than religion is about reminding others how pious we think we are. No, the proof in these puddings is not the signs we wear but how we act. Wouldn't that also be a better way to judge our presidential candidates than by the jewelry they wear?"
No matter the content, there is never a good reason to forward e-mail chain letters. There are more Internet-friendly ways to impart information to others than by forwarding [often] misleading e-mails to "everyone in your address book." As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | An e-mail chain letter warns of a new fee being charged by AOL to send e-mails. Like so many of these "warning" types of e-mails, the tiniest bit of truth has been blown totally out of proportion by lies, rumor and innuendo.
This announcement has, quite naturally, unleashed a flurry of misinformation. It has also rekindled the old e-mail tax hoax. The distinction here is between the old "government tax on e-mail" hoax and the plan proposed by AOL to charge advertisers a fee for delivering their message to customers.
The fee would apply only to those companies that deal in high-volume e-mails. The senders must promise to contact only people who have agreed to receive their messages (opt-in), or risk being blocked entirely. It is, ostensibly, a plan to reduce the amount of unsolicited spam mail. What it does NOT do is open the door to charge for personal e-mail. Users won't take kindly to paying a fee for the privilege (?) of using AOL, then another fee for sending an e-mail. There are too many e-mail services out there for that to happen.
AOL will still accept e-mail from businesses who have not paid, but paying senders will be assured that their messages will be delivered to AOL users' main in-boxes and marked as "AOL Certified E-Mail." Unpaid messages will be subject to AOL's spam-filtering process, which diverts suspicious messages to a special spam folder. Critics of the plan say that the company risks alienating both its users and the companies that send e-mail. What it will do, of course, is make lots of money for AOL (millions of dollars).
At one time, Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates also called for charging e-mail senders as a way to cut down on the volume of spam e-mail, but his proposal did not attract much support. AOL claims to have reduced spam e-mail by more than 85 percent since 2003, so spam control apparently isn't the only consideration for moving to charge for e-mail delivery.
Relax! You're not going to be paying a fee to send e-mail to your friends and relatives. Unless you're in the business of sending hundreds of thousands of e-mails, this won't affect you at all. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one says that as part of his conceptual art exhibit, a Costa Rican artist starved a dog to death.
Based upon our research, it would appear that the dog did not die. It was used by the "artist" (Guillermo Vargas) to make a personal statement regarding a friend of his who was killed by two Rottweiler dogs in 2005. This is reminiscent of a 2001 hoax, wherein people believed that a Chinese artist had cooked and eaten human body parts as an expression of his art. He didn't actually eat real human body parts, but lots of folks believed that he did. It, too, caused an international uproar, much like this one.
Under questioning by the press, the Costa Rican artist, known as Habucuc, was very evasive. He said, "I cannot say whether it is true or not that the dog died." When questioned about whether or not he fed the animal, he refused to respond. In October 2007, the Galería Códice (hosted the "exhibit") released a statement about this. It was in Spanish, so we used Google to translate. The following is a rough (very rough) English translation of part of their statement:
"dog remained at the site three days, beginning at 5 pm on Wednesday, August 15. He was loose all the time in the inner courtyard, except that lasted 3 hours the sample was fed regularly with dog food that the same Habucuc brought. Surprisingly, at dawn on Friday, 17, the dog escaped through the iron gates of the main entrance of the building, while the night watchman who had just feed cleaned the sidewalk outside."
Basically, the gallery is saying that the dog was on display for a few hours each day, but otherwise it roamed freely in another part of the gallery. They also maintain that the dog was fed with food that Vargas brought to the gallery. Finally, they state that after three days the dog ran away through a gate left open by a worker.
There are too many improbabilities here. First, no gallery owner in their right mind would ever allow something like this to take place, for obvious reasons. What stands out most is that the photos that accompany this story all show a live animal. There are no photos to prove that the dog died. If the dog had starved in front of the viewing public, there would be far more gruesome photos shown. Much is made of the fact that there are no photos of the dog being fed or given water. This means nothing. There are plenty of photos of animals and humans alike not being fed or given water, and they're obviously not dead. The gallery director stated that the animal was given food and water in another area of the gallery. Of course, it is entirely possible that the director is lying and that there was a massive cover-up, that the artist never fed the dog, and that no one came to his aid as he was left to die a horrible death. It's also possible that pigs can fly! Either an entire art gallery staff is covering up this dog's death, or it never happened. Finally, there is no reference to this story in any major news outlet, making it pretty clear that the story's origin is shaky at best. The only place that it shows up is in Internet blogs and e-mail chain letters. Considering how hungry the news media is for precisely this kind of story, the fact that they didn't cover it speaks volumes about the story's validity.
Our take on this, based on the evasive statements made by Vargas, coupled with the comments from the gallery, is that the dog did not die. Even the World Society for the Protection of Animals (WSPA) stated that "Information regarding the treatment and fate of the dog used in the 2007 exhibition is inconsistent ... ." Vargas designed his exhibit merely for the shock value. In that regard, he certainly succeeded. |
| | [close] |
|
| A1: | The dust from the November 2006 elections had barely settled when anti-Obama e-mails, written by wackos with their own agenda, first appeared. It seems as if each election year brings more and more dirt to the political arena. Most of the verbiage is fiction, designed only to play on people's own fears and prejudices about Muslims. The purveyors of this nonsense count on the fact that most folks will simply forward this mindless pap "to everyone they know," without taking the time to verify its veracity.
Even if Obama was a Muslim, which he is not, so what? Muslims pose no more of a threat to humanity than do Christians, or Jews, or any other religion that you care to name. The threat comes from the lunatic fringe within those religions, whether it be right-wing Christians or radical Muslims. There has even been a Muslim elected to serve in the current U.S. Congress (Keith Ellison from Minnesota).
It appears that there is more than one version of this e-mail making the rounds. Without going into great detail, here are a couple of points, which may or may not be in each version. First, neither he nor his parents were practicing Muslims (his father was an atheist), and Obama regards himself as a Christian.
Although the e-mail says otherwise, he did not convert to Christianity because he thought it "politically expedient to be a Christian when you are seeking political office in the United States." Rather, his conversion took place some eight years before he ever ran for any public office. Also, he has been a U.S. Senator since 2004, not 100 days as one e-mail states.
Allegations that Sen. Barack Obama was educated in a radical Muslim school, known as a "madrassa," are not accurate. Conducting their own investigation, CNN proved that the school that Obama attended for two years as a child in Indonesia was NOT a radical Muslim religious school. Further, a spokesperson for Indonesia's Ministry of Religious Affairs said that the school in question is not a Muslim school, but rather a public school, "open to people of all faiths." He also spent two years attending a Catholic school during his time in Indonesia.
Barack Obama has strong political views that will make him a target of the ultraconservative right-wing contingent. Trying to paint him with the extremist-Muslim paintbrush is just the tip of the iceberg for his campaign future. Hopefully, people will be able to see through this most despicable form of mud slinging. |
| A2: | "My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."
As humorous as that quote is, Obama didn't say it. It has been attributed to him, though, just like the stories of him being Muslim, or the Antichrist, or not being a U.S. citizen, etc., etc. The actual quote was from a Canadian, who sent it to a writer for the National Review, Mark Steyn, who in turn published it in his online blog in January of this year. In his own words, here is Steyn's explanation on the birth of an e-rumor:
"A few months back, just after the New Hampshire primary, a Canadian reader of mine - John Gross of Quebec - sent me an all-purpose stump speech for the 2008 campaign:
"My friends, we live in the greatest nation in the history of the world. I hope you'll join with me as we try to change it."
I thought this was so cute, I posted it on the Web at National Review. Whereupon one of those Internetty-type things happened, and three links and a Google search later the line was being attributed not to my correspondent but to Sen. Obama, and a few weeks after that I started getting e-mails from reporters from Florida to Oregon, asking if I could recall at which campaign stop the senator, in fact, uttered these words."
No politician is immune to phoney quotes. Even George Bush had a number of them attributed to him during the 2004 campaign. This is but one example: "A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls." That's funny, too, but Bush didn't say it. |
| A3: | The William Ayers terrorist-by-association accusation
William Ayers was a member of the 60's radical group, the Weather Underground. They were best know for bombings of federal buildings as a way to protest the Vietnam war. Most of the bombs that the Weathermen were blamed for had been placed to do only property damage. In fact, nobody died as a result of bombings in which Ayers said he participated.
After the Vietnam war ended, the group's activities petered out. Federal riot and bombing conspiracy charges against Ayers were dropped in 1974. He is now a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
The Obama and Ayers connection is tenuous, but there is a connection:
- Obama and Ayers worked together in 1995 on the Annenberg Challenge, an education-improvement project in Chicago (a charity endowed by publishing magnate Walter Annenberg). Obama served as chairman of the foundation's volunteer board, and Ayers was on a committee.
- In 1995 Ayers and his wife hosted a coffee for Chicago Democrats, at which then-State Senator Alice Palmer introduced Obama to guests as her chosen successor.
- Between 2000 and 2002, Obama and Ayers sat on the board of the Woods Fund, an anti-poverty organization.
- In 2001, Ayers contributed $200 to Obama's State Senate re-election fund.
Since 2002, there is little public evidence of their relationship. They definitely do not "pal around," and Obama never lied about working with Ayers. None of this is meant to exculpate Ayers, or excuse Obama for his relationship to him, though.
Obama has never expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8." An article in the New York Times stated that "[T]he two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers."
The description of Ayers as a "terrorist" is a matter of interpretation. Setting off bombs can fairly be described as terrorism even when they are intended to cause only property damage, which is what Ayers has admitted doing in his youth. So, in that regard, the abortion-clinic-bombing anti-abortion wing-nuts are also terrorists. But for nearly three decades since, Ayers has lived the relatively quiet life of an educator. It would be correct to call him a "former terrorist," and an unapologetic one at that. But if the McCain campaign means the word "terrorist" to invoke images of 9/11 or Oklahoma City, they are being misleading; Ayers is no Osama bin Laden or Timothy McVeigh, and he never was. |
| A4: | Obama snubs police officers
This one builds on the hoax that Obama doesn't want to be seen with the military. This new e-mail indicates that he doesn't want to be seen with law enforcement personnel.
This is yet another case of someone receiving an e-mail, then having their e-mail signature affixed to it when it was forwarded on to others. Jason Kern, whose name appears at the bottom of the e-mail, has now stated that he did not really write the e-mail, he just passed on some anonymous information that he had received. He also stated that he was actually not even at the location mentioned in the e-mail. He added the opening paragraph, hit the send button, and a new urban legend was born. As it turns out, although Kern is employed by law enforcement, it is most likely in a civilian capacity. Also, the agency for which he works is in Illinois, not Michigan, as named in the e-mail. The organization named in Kern's signature line (MTOA) has also issued a statement saying that the e-mail did not originate with them.
So, in the end, all we have is another anonymous, apocryphal, anecdotal e-mail. That's the beauty of these things, there is absolutely no way to verify their validity. We'll never know the actual author of this anti-Obama screed. Jason Kern, on the other hand, will forever be known as its originator (a good lesson to those who choose to indiscriminately forward e-mails).
No matter the content, there is never a good reason to forward e-mail chain letters. There are more Internet-friendly ways to impart information to others than by forwarding [often] misleading e-mails to "everyone in your address book." As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | An e-mail calling for a gasoline boycott shows up yearly around April. Just like the arrival of the spring flowers, one can expect to receive this ridiculous e-mail chain letter.
A boycott would have absolutely no effect. If the price actually did fall a little bit, people would break the boycott in droves to buy it at the lower price. The reality of any kind of boycott having an effect on the oil companies is just wishful thinking. If one were to actually give it some serious thought, the oil companies would welcome a boycott because they could charge even higher prices for their product.
Here is a short lesson on the economic facts of life. Boycotting company A's gas doesn't mean that they won't sell it to company B and C. So, one way or another, company A's gas will get to market, and they will get their money. Boycotting company A's gas stations will only hurt the owner/operators and employees of those stations. So, in the end, boycotting particular stations won't have much effect on the parent companies.
Most business works on the principle of supply and demand. The fuel industry is no different. When supply is higher than demand, prices are lower. When demand is higher than supply, the price goes up. If such a proposed boycott were successful (highly unlikely), the prices would be forced up, not down, because of the increased demand (and dwindling supply) on the rest of the oil industry.
There are really only two ways to influence gasoline prices. Producers must either make more oil and refined fuel available, or consumers must reduce the demand for it. It's as simple as that!
|
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This bill has been introduced during each Congressional session since 1997 (1997, 1999, 2001, 2003, and 2005). Each time, unfortunately, the bill died in committee. It has been submitted again during the current legislative session as the Breast Cancer Patient Protection Act of 2007.
Lifetime does have an online petition. Much like an e-mail petition, however, there is no way to verify signatures or prevent multiple "signing." A more productive approach to getting this, or any, legislation passed would be for interested voters to contact their elected representatives directly. Click the following links for contact information for Senators and Representatives.
The bill was [finally] passed by the House in September 2008 and sent to the Senate for approval. The Senate, unfortunately, has taken no action on the bill since January 2007. Hopefully, it will be moved out of committee and onto the floor for a vote. Those interested in tracking the progress of this latest attempt at passage can click HERE for Senate action, and HERE for the House version. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This piece of e-poop tells the story of Brutus the heroic military dog, part Boxer and part British Bull Mastiff, receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor for saving the life of his handler and four other soldiers in Iraq. It even comes complete with a photo of a large, hard-charging, slobbering dog.
The recent writer's strike in Hollywood must have left some out-of-work writer in need of something to do. That's the only explanation for this hoax e-mail. In this case, someone has taken a very real picture, then concocted a very false story to go along with it.
The dog pictured is not part Boxer and part British Bull Mastiff, is not named Brutus, and is not in the military (and never was in the military). He is a Belgian Malinois (a breed imported from Europe and used by police departments all over the country), his name is Spike, and he is a retired police dog from the Scottsdale, Arizona, Police Department (information provided by Sgt. Mark Clark, Scottsdale PD). The photo of Spike used in this hoax e-mail was taken in 2004 during the Desert Dog Regional Police K-9 Trials held in Scottsdale.
The rest of the story is right out of some movie - entertaining, but total fiction. Military and police service dogs are not trained to kill. They are trained to control a subject by barking or, if necessary, biting. It is not possible to train a dog to go away, come back later and kill someone. Finally, no dog has ever received the Congressional Medal of Honor.
As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete this one and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one says to never answer a cell phone while it is being charged or you will be electrocuted.
In August 2004, a man in Chavara, India, was reportedly electrocuted when he answered a call on a mobile phone that was charging (New Indian Express, Wednesday, August 11, 2004). That news article contained no information about the type of phone used, or what caused it to electrocute its owner. Current flowing into a charging cell phone is not strong enough to kill anyone. There have been no other accounts of similar incidents in any other media, and no manufacturers or consumer agencies have warned against using cell phones while they are being charged.
This 2004 e-mail chain letter is the stuff of urban legends, however. Different versions have the victim described as "this following person" or "a close relative of mine." Some of the e-mails are signed "Dr. D. Suresh Kumar R&D." The actual victim described in the news article was thirty-one years of age and married with a son. He was not a "youth" as stated in the e-mail.
This appears to be a work of fiction inspired by the bizarre notion of someone being electrocuted by a cell phone. As should be done with all e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others.
UPDATE: Three years after this hoax first appeared, some enterprising hoax-writer added photos in an attempt to make it appear authentic. This merely proves the old saying that you can put lipstick on a pig, but it's still a pig. It was a hoax then, and it's still a hoax now. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | Yikes! Telemarketers will soon have access to your cell phone number.
As is the case with most hoaxes and urban legends, this one is put together with some fact and some fiction.
First, the fact. One CAN register a cell phone number with the FTC's National Do Not Call List (designed to stop telemarketing calls). This really isn't necessary, though, because federal law already prohibits telemarketing calls to cell phones.
Now, the fiction. Cell phone numbers are NOT going to be released to telemarketers in the near future, nor are they ever going to be released to telemarketers. This rumor probably began with the announcement a few years ago that a group of cell phone companies were going to combine forces to produce a listing of cell phone users' names and numbers that would be available to directory assistance providers. This would not be a printed phone book, but rather something that would be accessed by calling directory assistance at 411, or 555-1212 with an area code, just as one does now to find a phone number. According to the the cell phone companies, those who choose to participate in this service will be able to "opt-in" (one would have to specifically ask to be included in the listing). Those that choose not to participate will not be included. To date, this service is not yet available. Finally, telemarketers do not use 411 services for contacting people.
Recently, an information gathering company (Intelius) has been advertising a cell phone directory. What they offer, however, is not a cell phone directory as described above. Information brokers such as Intelius, ZabaSearch, Acxiom and ChoicePoint, gather all kinds of personal information from public records, and sell that information for a fee. This information is available to anyone, of course, because it can be found in public records. These companies make their money by doing the actual research for folks that don't want to expend the time and energy to do it themselves. While anyone can search the Intelius database, viewing the actual results will cost $14.95. Because this information is gleaned from public records, it is not always accurate or current. So, in the end, a cell phone number may or may not even be part of the information package supplied by Intelius.
One should not expect to receive accurate information from an e-mail chain letter. And one should definitely not pass on e-mail chain letters to others.
National Do Not Call Registry:
register online: https://www.donotcall.gov/Register/Reg.aspx
register via phone: 1-888-382-1222 |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one says that one should send a card to "A Recovering American Soldier" at Walter Reed Army Medical Center while addressing their Christmas cards.
Although this "feel good" idea sounds nice, and will surely pull at the heart strings of those that receive this chain letter, it just isn't true. Unfortunately, following the recommendation in the e-mail will not achieve the desired results, and will result in needless expense (for the cards and postage).
First, the U.S. Postal Service will not accept mail to the military unless it is addressed to a specific person. This has been their official policy since the terrorist attacks in 2001. Mail addressed as "Any Service Member," "A Recovering American Soldier," or any variation thereof, will not be accepted. If the mail is deposited into a collection box it will be returned to the sender. Items without return addresses are opened in their Mail Recovery Center Network to determine the sender's address. If it is impossible to determine the sender's address, they donate care items to local charities.
Walter Reed has issued a statement to inform those individuals who want to show their appreciation through the mail that they cannot accept packages, letters, and holiday cards addressed to "Any Wounded Soldier" or "A Recovering American Soldier." Rather, they recommend that instead of sending such a letter or package, folks should consider making a donation to one of the nonprofit organizations dedicated to helping the troops and their families. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one urges you to press the "Clear" button at the gas pump to prevent being overcharged.
One has to envy people that have so much free time on their hands that they can write such a creative, scary, story. And that's all that it is, a scary story. Even though this piece of e-poop is relatively new (May), we have already seen different variations on the original e-mail (as often happens with hoax e-mails).
This particular hoaxster is counting on folks not knowing how credit card/gas pump transactions actually work. When a customer uses a credit (or debit) card, the transaction goes directly to the card processing company. None of that information is displayed to employees inside the store. Next, there is no such thing as a "clear" button on the gas pumps. The transaction is completed when the customer inserts the hose nozzle back into the pump. No information is "stored until the next customer inserts their card." It has long since gone to the card processing company. There is a "cancel" button located near the keypads, but that is for starting over in the event of the customer entering incorrect information, or to cancel the transaction altogether. That, however, has nothing to do with the fairy tale told in that e-mail.
Some versions of this e-mail come with an official signature at the end. People tend to give more credibility to an e-mail when a name and/or title is attached to it. Quite often, when a person sends an e-mail, their signature is automatically added at the end of the message, leading folks to believe that he or she is responsible for originating it. Many hoax and urban legend e-mail chain letters display an official looking signature, giving it a false sense of authenticity. Just because someone appears to have written it doesn't mean that they didn't just forward it and, unwittingly, add their name to the signature line.
As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | The e-mail states that one can survive a heart attack when alone by merely coughing.
The 1999 e-mail about coughing during a heart attack left the impression that the cough CPR technique was endorsed by Rochester General Hospital (in New York), as well as Mended Hearts (a heart attack support group). In 2004, a Powerpoint presentation containing the same information appeared on the Internet, this time giving full credit to Rochester General.
Rochester General had nothing to do with any of this, and they have no idea as to how their name came to be associated with it. They have issued a statement denying that they ever endorsed that e-mail. Although the text of the e-mailed advice was published in a Mended Hearts newsletter, that organization has since disavowed it and has a page on its website asking readers not to take the e-mail seriously because they don't stand behind it. To quote Mended Hearts, "Coughing won't fend off a heart attack."
This story, while not quite a hoax (yet), is an urban legend and should not be taken seriously. Nor should anyone ever take medical advice from an e-mail chain letter. This "helpful" e-mail could help you right into the grave.
For this one we defer to both the American Heart Association and the American Red Cross. Neither organization endorses this procedure! |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This message explains that as of July 1, 2001 (later versions leave out the year or contain the current year), "the four major credit bureaus in the US will be allowed . . . to release your credit info, mailing addresses, phone numbers . . . to anyone who requests it." The message goes on to explain that you can call a toll-free number, 888-5optout (888-567-8688), in order to opt-out of having your credit information sold. In true chain letter style, this message is not completely accurate. It is a case of mixing apples and oranges:
Apples: The Financial Services Modernization Act required financial institutions to notify their customers of their organization's privacy policies by July 1, 2001. If the bank, credit card company, insurance company, or brokerage firm sells customer data to third party companies, it must provide its customers the ability to say "no" to such data sharing - in other words, to "opt-out." It is then the responsibility of the customer to contact their own financial institution in order to opt-out after receiving such notification.
Oranges: The law says nothing about a toll-free number enabling individuals to do one-stop opting-out. That's a requirement of an amendment to a different federal law, the Fair Credit Reporting Act. One of the provisions of a 1996 amendment was a requirement that credit bureaus (not financial institutions) provide an opt-out opportunity for consumers who do not want their names and addresses sold to credit card companies, who in turn mail pre-approved offers of credit to consumers.
It's important to note that this toll-free number has a limited purpose - to enable consumers to opt-out of receiving pre-approved offers of credit, nothing more. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This piece of garbage e-mail says that a can design introduced by Dr Pepper included the text of the Pledge of Allegiance with the words "under God" omitted and called for a boycott of the product.
The controversy regarding a special design for Dr Pepper cans that incorporated words (3 words!) from the Pledge of Allegiance is several years old (November 2001). The limited time period during which the "new" cans were available ended in February 2002! That item was given renewed interest by a United States Court of Appeals decision regarding the constitutionality of the words "under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance. And like all such junk e-mails, this one just won't go away.
This same hoax has been resurrected a couple of times through the years, with either Pepsi or Coca-Cola named as the evil corporations. The Pepsi and Coke messages are total fabrications! Neither bottling company has ever created any packaging containing an edited version of the Pledge of Allegiance.
Click HERE to see the official response from Dr Pepper. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one directs unsuspecting people to the National Motor Vehicle License Bureau website, which offers a free searchable database of over 121 million U.S. driver's license photos and license information.
With the fear of identity theft on the rise, this e-mail chain letter is sure to strike fear in almost everyone. Everyone, that is, except for those that have discovered one of the biggest Internet jokes of all time. At the risk of spoiling the punch line, that's all this is, a joke!
The "gotcha" comes when a search is done for somebody's name. After a short wait, the database search eventually "finds" the license information. What is shown, however, is a fake driver's license with a picture of a baboon on it!
Even when a prank is suspected, the fear of identity theft often prevents folks from actually visiting the site. For those wanting to try it, just enter bogus information (or the name of a friend).
The Motor Vehicle Operator License Identification Act, by the way, is a figment of someone's imagination and doesn't even exist. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This e-mail tells of a young boy who died from inhaling the contents of a can of "Dust-Off." Dust-Off is a compressed air product typically used to clean the dust from computers, keyboards, printers, and other hard to reach areas.
Unfortunately, this true story is yet another example of the often fatal fad of inhalant abuse known as "huffing" (or "bagging" if the substance is inhaled from a plastic or paper bag).
While this e-mail might lead the reader to believe that Dust-Off is the sole culprit, the truth is that there are thousands of inhalants and solvents that are routinely abused for the purpose of getting high, but that ultimately lead to death. Inhalants are the drug of choice among pre-teens and early teens. Common household products, like hair spray, spray paint, glue, typewriter correction fluid, nail polish remover, the propellant in canned whipped cream, spray deodorants, air freshener spray, gasoline, butane lighters, and many more, can all be used to get a quick high. These products are inexpensive and easily obtainable. Truth be told, while most parents are aware of illicit drugs (thanks to TV and other media), most are completely unaware of inhalant abuse. And youngsters are totally clueless about the dangers of huffing - all they know is that inhaling black permanent marker pens will get them high. Because they are legal and familiar, the substances used are mistakenly thought of as safe.
The makers of Dust-Off are not unaware of the potential for abuse. They have a warning label in big red letters on each can. That alone won't end the abuse, of course, just as warning labels on cigarettes don't curb smoking. The key is education. Even though inhalants often get relatively little attention when drug use is discussed, it is essential that the nature of these substances and the effects and dangers of this very common form of abuse are clearly understood.
The name of Tracey Lowey found at the end of some versions has nothing to do with the message, by the way. It was added, as so often happens, after the message was forwarded by Lowey and his mail program automatically affixed his signature. This, of course, leads folks to believe that this unfortunate incident occurred in Calgary, Alberta, rather than the actual location, Painesville Township, Ohio (Cleveland). |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | It's true, but there is a catch. Callers must listen to a 10-second recorded advertisement or promotion before they are connected to their phone number. After listening to the ad the caller can choose to either be connected to the telephone number that they requested, or they can receive additional information from the advertiser, who pays the 411 service when they receive the call instead (think kickbacks). |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one talks about how Fuji Co. removed Israel from a complimentary world map that it gave to customers with a purchase. The writer of this hoax should have checked his facts before spreading malicious rumors. As seen in the quote below from Fuji, they were aware of the problem and took measures to fix it.
"In looking into the matter, we have learned that a third party wholesaler ... produced the calendar with such a map. They did so on their own initiative ... without our permission and in violation of our policy regarding the use of the Fujifilm logo. As soon as we learned of the problem, corrective action was taken to stop the distribution of these calendars."
This is nothing more than "boycott" clap-trap! |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This e-mail chain letter states that President Bush paid for the funeral of a 6-year-old boy who drowned near his ranch in Crawford, Texas. At this point, we are unable to verify that claim.
The e-mail tells the sad, but true, story of a little boy that drowned in Gatesville, Texas, near the President's home. It tells of the heroic measures of the rescuers to try and save the boy, including efforts by some of the President's Secret Service detail. Tragically, the boy did not live.
The following is extracted from a March 8, 2004, Associated Press story about the incident:
DPS troopers and Secret Service agents stationed at Bush's ranch two miles from the pond heard an emergency call and came to help, the DPS spokesman said Monday.
When the agents saw that the Gatesville Fire Department could not find Samuel because they did not have scuba equipment, they called for the ranch's special response team, the spokesman said.
After the team of 10 military medics and Secret Service agents arrived with scuba equipment, a Secret Service diver found the boy on his second dive and pulled him to shore.
Rescuers performed CPR on Samuel until a Blackhawk helicopter arrived from Bush's ranch to take the boy to Hillcrest Baptist Medical Center. They continued the CPR on the helicopter, but the boy was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital.
The e-mail message goes on to say that when the family went to the funeral home to make the arrangements, they found out that an anonymous donor had paid for everything. The e-mail states that, "After much "detective" work, it is believed that President Bush is that anonymous donor."
While it is quite conceivable that the President was the anonymous donor, none of the newspaper stories relating to this incident mention an anonymous donor. It would be inconceivable that the press would not investigate such a rumor. Responding to an inquiry from Hoax Busters, the writer, Debbie Barnes, stated:
"The only part of my email that is [sic] I cannot back up factual [sic] is President Bush's monetary contribution for the funeral services. The only thing I can tell you is what was told me [sic] by my family and friends. As I said, we only suspect (believe) that the President had a hand in the financial arrangements."
She also said:
"I cannot help what people think or choose to believe when they read the email. As I said before, all I was trying to accomplish was to let my friends know that George Bush is a good neighbor regardless of where he stands in the eye of the public. I hate that my letter was misleading because I never intended for it to be that way at all."
There is never a good reason to forward e-mail chain letters to everyone in your address book. Just delete this one, and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | E-mail lists companies that have supposedly filed for bankruptcy, warning that gift cards from these businesses won't be valid much longer.
This one first appeared in April 2008. The author of this story lacks understanding of the workings of financial reorganization, or has conveniently chosen to ignore it. Just because a company files bankruptcy does not necessarily mean that it is going out of business. Because of the less-than-stellar economy, some retail businesses may be closing their doors, but not all of the ones named in this e-mail chain letter will be doing so.
There are two types of bankruptcy, Chapter 7 and Chapter 11 respectively. Chapter 7 is where someone's nonexempt property is sold and the proceeds are distributed amongst their creditors. They are, in effect, liquidating their assets and going completely out of business. A chapter 11 debtor, on the other hand, usually proposes a plan of reorganization to keep its business alive and pay creditors over time. Real estate mogul Donald Trump, for example, has sought protection under Chapter 11 a couple of times.
Since this one first appeared, a long list business names have been added to the list (in true hoax and urban legend form). Most of those new names, however, are not really going out of business. Of the companies listed in the original e-mail, Hollywood Video filed Chapter 11 in October 2007, so this is old news and they are still in business. Levitz also filed in 2007, but went into total liquidation and closed their stores. Sharper Image filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in February 2008. Linens 'n Things filed Chapter 11 in May 2008, but are now in the process of closing their stores. Circuit City filed for Chapter 11 in November 2008, so the original listing in the April e-mail was just a hoax. Bed, Bath and Beyond is not filing bankruptcy, nor is Performance Team Freight, and they don't even issue gift cards.
A few of the businesses named in the latest e-mail may be closing some of their under-performing stores, but none are expected to actually go out of business. Bankruptcy laws do not require companies to redeem gift certificates, although some do. While consumers may think of gift cards as cash, bankruptcy courts consider them as debt, and therefore holders are not necessarily going to get paid. With more companies expected to file for Chapter 11 protection, financial experts recommend using gift cards as soon as possible. In other words, use 'em or lose 'em! |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one states that using cruise control on wet roads or during heavy rain can cause loss of vehicle control.
Possible? Yes. Are the anecdotal stories true? Probably not. There really is no way to verify their veracity. There are currently two versions of the same story making the rounds. One involves a man, the other a woman.
Any road that is not dry is a potential hazard if using cruise control. Snow, ice, slush or rain can cause wheel-spin and loss of control. The only way to stop this wheel-spin and maintain control is to immediately reduce power without applying the brakes. An activated cruise control, however, will continue to apply power, keeping the wheels spinning. By the time the cruise control is disengaged, control will already have been lost. Those folks who might be inclined to use their cruise control during inclement weather should refrain from doing so because the time that it takes to disengage the cruise could be the time needed to recover from a problem.
The best defense for hydroplaning is to maintain correct tire pressure, reduce speed, and, best of all, just don't drive during bad weather. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | Drugged travelers awaken in ice-filled bathtubs to discover that their kidneys have been harvested by organ thieves.
This is a classic Urban Legend! The kidney harvesting story has been in circulation on the Internet since early 1997. The idea of kidney theft appeared in 1991 in the television show Law & Order (Sonata for a Solo Organ), and in several books and films, including the horror movie Urban Legend (1998). It even showed up in a February 2006 episode of the television series Las Vegas (Urban Legends), further proof that you can't keep a good urban legend down (I'm kidding, there is no such thing as a good urban legend).
In an effort to quash this rumor, the National Kidney Foundation has asked that anyone who claims to have had their kidneys illegally removed to contact them. So far, no one has.
A new version of this story places the hapless victim in Australia. That this story has now changed locations from the United States to Australia is no surprise. Such is the power of Urban Legends to continue ad nauseam through the years.
UPDATE: In a story seemingly inspired by this urban legend, a kidney theft ring has been broken up in India. Police characterized the scheme as an attempt to harvest kidneys from the poor and sell the organs to wealthy patients. The unwilling victims would be lured to a location with promises of employment. They would then be sedated, only to wake up later minus a kidney. Unlike the urban legend, though, these victims were left with one kidney. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one says that eating outdated pancake mix will kill you! That story was printed in a recent Dear Abby column, and is now selling all over the Internet like, well..., like hot cakes.
Any food item past its expiration date is susceptible to mold growth. Fuzzy green dots on bread or white dust on cheese are good examples of that. That mold, in and of itself, is not toxic, just gross. Penicillin, after all, is derived from mold. What makes it toxic is allergies. If one has an allergy to mold, and ingests something that contains mold, there would be a reaction that could be potentially life threatening.
People with seafood allergies don't eat fish, people with nut allergies don't eat peanut butter, and folks with mold allergies should not eat anything moldy. Outdated pancake mix is not a killer, nor is any mold found in that mix, unless one has a mold allergy. The real question is why would anyone keep pancake mix, or anything for that matter, two-years past its freshness date!
Dear Abby is just as vulnerable to anonymous, apocryphal stories as the rest of us. She has, through the years, been stung more than once by an urban legend or hoax message. Seeing something in her column does not necessarily validate a story.
While the Dear Abby story may be questionable, we do know that a nineteen-year-old in South Carolina did die under similar circumstances in 2001. That person suffered from allergies to a variety of substances, but forensic tests revealed that he died as a result of a reaction to mold. In that case, the pancake mix was at least two-years-old.
The message here is not about pancake mix, it is about anaphylactic reactions and common sense. Use food products before they expire, and throw out products after the expiration date.
As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete this one and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This was true at one time, but not anymore. She has been reunited with relatives.
Like any good e-mail chain letter, though, it will be circulating around the Internet for years to come. (Just kidding, there is no such thing as a "good" e-mail chain letter!)
Just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one says that "you will LOSE EVERYTHING IN YOUR PC, And [sic] the person who sent it to you will gain access to your name, e-mail and password."
In 2007, a hoaxster turned an actual warning about a real virus into a hoax. They did that by affixing the name of the real warning (postcard virus) onto the text of a hoax dating back to 2000 (virtual card for you). They included a link to the Snopes website for authenticity because that site had verified the existence of the real virus warning (but not the hoax version). This was meant to make folks believe the hoax message without actually verifying it themselves before passing it along to their friends. Refer to the Postcard Virus question below.
Now, history has repeated itself. Some hoaxster has taken another real warning and turned it into a hoax. This time, the subject line of the real warning (mail server report) has been added to the text of a hoax from 2002 (life is beautiful). Again, the Snopes link has been added to further confuse folks. While Snopes has indeed verified the warning message about the new virus (actually it's a worm, not a virus), they did not verify it in its present form. They verified the actual e-mail regarding the worm. The one showing up in inboxes all around the world is the retitled 2002 hoax warning.
The worm, which comes as an attachment to the real e-mail (not the hoax e-mail), is not destructive, and does not do all of the nasty things described in the hoax e-mail. The real e-mail comes with an attached file. The message claims that a virus was detected in a sent e-mail. The recipient is asked to use the attached file to install updates that will eliminate the supposedly detected virus. If the file is opened, the worm self-installs and begins sending copies of itself to addresses found on the computer's hard drive. It also attempts to download other malicious programs from the Internet. Here's the bottom line: Practice safe computing (click the link of the same name on our site) and update Windows systems with the latest security updates.
No matter the content, there is never a good reason to forward e-mail chain letters. There are more Internet-friendly ways to impart information to others than by forwarding [often] misleading e-mails to "everyone in your address book." As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one is actually a compilation of three different stories. It is an urban legend, and is now in the hoax category.
Inside Edition did air a segment very much as described, in August 1998. However the point of the episode was not to report that an epidemic of such abductions was taking place; just that it was possible to persuade women to follow a stranger out of a mall and into a van.
The Tuttle Mall incident (which never happened) is a variation of "the Hairy Armed Hitch Hiker" urban legend that surfaced in 1983. These two stories were combined and began to circulate on the Internet in 1998.
The link to JCPenney came about when an employee forwarded the story with her e-mail signature attached. Folks then believed that these alleged abductions were occurring around the mall that contained that particular JCPenney store. The JCPenney version has been circulating since early 2000.
Despite the claim of this being "a new scam to abduct women," kidnappings by deception are neither the norm nor on the increase. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | The idea that "margarine is but one molecule from being plastic" is an oft quoted statement found in a 2003 e-mail chain letter explaining why margarine may increase the risk of coronary artery disease. That e-mail does nothing more than prey on people's fears, as well as their ignorance of basic science.
Here's a quick high school chemistry refresher. An atom is the basic component found in all ordinary matter around us. It is the smallest unit of matter, and is the building block of all matter. A molecule is a group of atoms (more than one) joined together to form a specific structure or shape. One group of molecules, for instance, joins together to form water, while another group of molecules joins together to form the glass that holds the water. The addition or subtraction of only one atom can change the molecular structure of anything. As seen in the examples given below, the addition of only one oxygen atom will change one thing into something completely different.
In the end, the statement about plastic and margarine is meaningless, which makes this e-mail chain letter a hoax. Many items are chemically similar, but that doesn't make them similar in their actual appearance or effect. Even the slightest variation in atomic structure can make a world of difference in the qualities of those substances. Carbon monoxide (CO) is one atom away from carbon dioxide (CO2). In spite of the fact that both consist of only carbon and oxygen, they have different chemical properties. Both carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are colorless, odorless gases, but carbon monoxide is a deadly poison, while carbon dioxide is something that we breathe in and out in fairly high concentrations every day. Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) is but one atom away from water (H2O), but you definitely don't want to drink it. Methamphetamine (C10H15N) is one atom away from pseudoephedrine (C10H15NO). While methamphetamine is a highly addictive drug, pseudoephedrine is found in many over-the-counter cold medicines.
Two years after the e-mail first appeared, some enterprising hoax writer attempted to show that margarine was originally developed as a turkey fattener. After the turkeys died from eating it, the investors in the research foisted it upon the public as a butter substitute, and margarine as we know it was born. It never ceases to amaze just how creative some of these hoax writers really are. Actually, margarine has been around for well over a century. In 1869, Emperor Louis Napoleon III offered a prize for the formulation of a butter substitute for use by the armed forces and the lower classes. Western Europe was running low on fats and oils at that time, and butter was expensive and in short supply. A French chemist won the contest, and named his invention oleomargarine.
According to the Mayo Clinic, margarine usually tops butter when it comes to heart health (as long as it has a low trans fat content). It is made from vegetable oils, so it contains no cholesterol. Margarine is also higher in "good" fats (unsaturated) than butter. Butter, on the other hand, is made from animal fat, so it contains cholesterol and high levels of saturated fat.
No matter the content, there is never a good reason to forward e-mail chain letters. There are more Internet-friendly ways to impart information to others than by forwarding [often] misleading e-mails to "everyone in your address book." As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | Sometimes, hoaxsters will take old missing-child messages, change the date, then send them out again for well meaning people to "send them to everyone that they know." It's a good idea to check known hoax Web sites first to see if, in fact, the message is nothing more than a rehash of an earlier one, and whether or not the child has been located. Lack of specific information, such as the exact location of the incident and a contact number for local police add credence to the message being nothing more than a hoax. Click HERE to check Hoax Busters for possible sick, injured, or missing child hoaxes.
A good example of missing child e-mails being regurgitated and turned into hoaxes is the one about Kelsey Brooke Jones (circa 1999). That one spawned the Christopher John Mineo e-mail, which was then followed by the Penny Brown hoax e-mail. The latest incarnations of the Penny Brown e-mail include one about Ashley Flores and one about Michael Hunt (same text, different names). The Ashley Flores hoax has, in turn, spawned the Evan Trembley hoax.
Contact the originator of the message before passing it on to determine if the child has been located. Search local newspaper databases and check with local police. If there is one for the particular state, check with the missing childrens agency, and finally, check with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and search their database.
Even if the reported incident is true, the problem with sending out messages such as these is that there is no way to stop them after the problem has been resolved. Sympathy chain letters just go on for years and years and years. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: |
This one warns that mulch made from wood waste from New Orleans contains termites.
Here's a surprise, this warning is totally false!
In October 2005, the Louisiana State University Agricultural Center issued a warning about moving or using wood infested with Formosan subterranean termites. To prevent moving termites to other areas, the Louisiana Department of Agriculture and Forestry imposed a quarantine for the Formosan subterranean termite in the state's parishes.
Termites hitch rides to new areas in infested cellulose (railroad ties and utility poles, wood from structures, lumber, pallets, landscape timbers, trees, mulch, and paper). The quarantine states in part that movement of any wood or cellulose material is prohibited unless such wood or cellulose material has been fumigated or otherwise treated for Formosan termites and is approved for movement by the Department. The ban on removing wood waste from southern Louisiana was also mentioned in a November 2005 article in USA Today: "No wood waste can leave the state because it could contain voracious Formosan termites."
The information from the LSU AgCenter was most probably the basis for this fairy story. Mulch made from damaged trees in New Orleans will not be sold at Home Depot, Lowes, or anywhere else. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one states that Muslims are getting their own Christmas stamp, even though they don't believe in Christ.
This is yet another case of a little bit of truth, and a whole lot of lies, innuendo and outright hatred, spouted by a few idiots.
First of all, calling for a boycott is ridiculous because a holiday stamp from another religion is never just handed out, they are by request only and must be asked for specifically.
The truth is that the stamp is real, and it commemorates two Islamic holidays that have nothing to do with Christmas (Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha). It was first issued in September 2001, ten days before that tragic day, and reissued in October 2002. The statements about the acts of terror being attributed to Muslims are also correct. But the writer of this piece of hate garbage asks you to believe that ALL Muslims are terrorists. That's like saying that ALL Christians spend their days bombing abortion clinics.
President Bush has said that "the face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace." There is even a page on the White House website about the stamp.
The EID stamp will be available this year at the first-class postage rate.
As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete this, and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | The Osama Bin Laden photographs virus-warning e-mail has seen several manifestations. The first, in 2004, pointed to a website where a file purporting to contain Osama photographs could be downloaded. In reality, that file contained a Trojan horse which could allow an attacker to compromise a computer, gaining control over it. What it didn't do was crash computers, and, if infected, the computer could be fixed. Nothing happened if one merely opened the original e-mail. The damage occurred by clicking on the link to the website, downloading the file, and then opening that file. Then, in 2005, when the aforementioned website ceased to exist, the infected file began to circulate as an attachment to an e-mail.
The good news is that the Trojans were easily detected (and removed) using an anti-virus program. Click on the "safe computing" link on our site for information on how to practice safe computing and not become infected (and then follow that advice). There is no substitute for practicing safe computing, as well as using up-to-date anti-virus software.
The latest versions of this e-mail "warning" may or may not even mention Osama at all. Rather, they talk about an "Olympic torch" and "invitation" virus. Neither of these exist, there is no attached file, and that e-mail is just a hoax.
In the end, this is just another e-mail chain letter. As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, delete it and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This is a call to boycott Oscar Meyer because they won't give free hot dogs to our soldiers in Iraq and they "don't support the war and anyone in it."
A 2004 e-mail hoax directed against Starbucks called for a boycott because they did not support the war in Iraq (see link below). Flash forward three years, change the words Starbucks to Oscar Meyer and coffee to hot dogs, and we wind up with a carbon copy of that earlier hoax about the coffee giant not supporting the troops. We said then that we had no idea why someone was launching that attack against Starbucks, and we have no idea now why someone has changed the object of their wrath toward Oscar Meyer. The point is that it was a hoax then, and it remains a hoax now, even with a different name.
This is yet another worthless boycott letter, and should just be deleted, never passed on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | The stories being circulated on the Internet are fiction, although there is one unproven report of this happening. According to police in Mobile, Alabama, 54 year old Bertha Johnson told them that in November 1999, she was knocked out and robbed by someone who had her sample a fragrance. An article in the Mobile Register newspaper from November 11, 1999, quoted Johnson as saying that the woman claimed she was selling cologne. After one whiff, Johnson said she passed out and awoke to discover that she and her car were no longer in the parking lot of the bank, she had a splitting headache, and $800 was missing from her purse, including some money that she was depositing for her employer. Johnson had to battle skeptics who believed that she invented the story and took the money herself. No evidence was found to substantiate what she alleged. Whether it really happened to Bertha Johnson or not, none of the other stories circulating on the Internet have been found to be true, and there are numerous versions claiming that the perfume selling incidents have happened in various cities.
Medical experts (as well as the many people who were anesthetized in the old days with ether) say one hit of ether is not enough to knock someone out. The problem with this one is that simply taking a sniff of ether or chloroform will not knock you out. That only happens in the movies. You must breath the fumes through a saturated rag for several seconds before you start to go under. So, as long as you don't stick the perfume bottle up your nose and snort the liquid up into your sinuses, you are not going to be knocked out. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | According to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, all firms that use phenylpropanolamine in their products were asked in 2000 to voluntarily discontinue them. This action was in response to a study by researchers at Yale University that found an increased risk of stroke in people who were using products with phenylpropanolamine in them.
The FDA says the chance of stroke is small and was found to have mostly affected women, but because of the seriousness of stroke and the difficulty in predicting who could be at risk, it was best to ask for the manufacturers to voluntarily remove it.
One of the problems in the wake of the FDA request is that some e-mails circulating on the Internet list particular products from particular companies giving the impression that the company should be blamed for a defective product, a misunderstanding that the drug manufacturers are worried about. They want the public to know that they voluntarily removed phenylpropanolamine from their products.
Some versions of the story say phenylpropanolamine is also harmful to children, but that was not a conclusion of the Yale study.
Because the study came out several years ago, the odds of finding any over-the-counter medication containing phenylpropanolamine are nil. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one states that if one is forced to withdraw money from their ATM machine, entering the PIN in reverse will alert the police of a crime in progress.
The story about a "panic PIN" has been around in one form or another since 1999. There is some basis of fact, however (as there usually is in urban legends and hoaxes). A man by the name of Joseph Zingher holds a patent (issued in 1998) on software that would allow ATM customers to enter an emergency PIN (usually their normal PIN reversed) if being robbed or forced to withdraw money (SafetyPIN). The emergency code would direct the machine to dispense cash after sending a secret message to a security company or local police station. In 1999, an Illinois state regulatory body, the Office of Banks and Real Estate, conducted a study that concluded that a statewide reverse PIN system would be too expensive, and that there was no proof that such a system would reduce the frequency of ATM crimes.
Zingher has spent the last several years shopping the idea to banks in Illinois, Georgia and Florida. So far, he has found no takers. By his own counting, he spent over $100,000 on patent applications, research studies and marketing to push the software. He says that banks aren't interested in advertising ATMs as potential crime sites. Unfortunately for Zingher, IBM received a patent two years ago for its own "duress PIN" system. IBM, whose patent cites Zingher's invention, says it has no immediate plans to use the technology.
So, the bottom line is that although this scenario may one day be possible, the technology is not currently in use. That e-mail is simply not true. As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete this one and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This e-mail chain letter describes the plight of a little Polish girl named Alexandra who was badly burned in a rigging fire. It also says that every time it is forwarded, her parents will receive 3 cents to help pay the medical bills.
This is an unfortunate case of truth and fiction, mixing to form a new, if not cruel, sympathy hoax.
The incident was widely reported in the Polish media, which made tracking down the story difficult (not being able to understand Polish). We were able to take the story, as reported in the Polish press, and run it through an online Polish to English translation site. Even though the translation was not grammatically perfect, we did glean the gist of the story.
The true part is that in June 2005, a 14 month old Polish girl was severely burned in a house fire (not a rigging fire, as stated in the e-mail). The girl's real name is Ola Kuczma. Ola is a diminutive form of Aleksandra (not Alexandra). Ola had to undergo serious, and expensive, medical treatments. The girl's parents asked the public for financial help, and an e-mail plea was circulated in Poland. That e-mail included an account number for a Polish bank where donations could be made to help the family.
Unfortunately, hoaxsters got hold of that e-mail. They eliminated the bank account numbers and other useful details, such as any kind of contact information. Then they added the part about the e-mail tracking, which, of course, is a hoax in and of itself. It is sad that this tragedy has been turned into a hoax. But, that is the nature of those that write hoax messages - they just don't care about the harm that they do to others. |
| | [close] |
|
| A: | This one starts out by proclaiming "BAD Virus --CNN announced -- Snopes confirms as real."
What started out as a warning about a real virus has itself now turned into a hoax. Some hoaxster has taken the old "Virtual Card" hoax e-mail, changed the name to "Postcard from a Family Member," and sent it winging its way around the Internet again. The text of the old hoax e-mail is the same, only the name has been changed. The link to Snopes was added to further confuse people. They verified a different e-card virus threat with a similar name. Don't confuse the two!
Here's how to tell the difference. First, the real virus DID NOT come as an attachment to an e-mail. That e-mail, with a subject line about receiving a greeting card from a friend or relative, had no attachments. It did contain a link to a website, however. If one were to click on the link they would have been exposed to a bunch of browser and application exploits that would try to install malicious programs (computer hijackers) on Windows computers that didn't have the latest Microsoft security updates installed.
The text of this new e-mail is actually the old "A Card for You" virus hoax. You can see an example of that by clicking on the "five telltale signs" link on our homepage and looking at the second example at the bottom of that page. The writer of this hoax e-mail has merely replaced "A Card for You" with "You've received a Postcard from a Family member." While Snopes has indeed verified the existence of the new virus, they did not verify it in this new form. They verified the actual e-mail that contained the link to the malicious website. The one showing up in inboxes all around the world is the "new" old-hoax warning.
Here's the bottom line: Practice safe computing (click the link of the same name on our site) and update Windows systems with the latest security updates. If your system is not secured with an anti-virus program, and patched with latest security patches, the chances to become infected while surfing the Internet will be higher. All the more reason to practice safe computing and update Windows systems with the latest security updates. Most anti-virus programs can now detect and remove this kind threat as well.
UPDATE: Apparently invoking the Snopes name to scare people wasn't enough. Newer versions of this hoax warning now include the name of Norton Anti-Virus to also "confirm" that this is the most destructive virus ever.
UPDATE: The hoax that won't die ("card for you") is back with a new name. It's now called the "postcard from Hallmark" virus warning, but it's the same old tired hoax.
As should be done with ALL e-mail chain letters, just delete this one and don't pass it on to others. |
| | [close] |
|
|