One day, a man is walking his dog through a snow covered field in the middle of winter, when he discovers a man's dead body. The man's skin is extremely pale, so he clearly has been dead for awhile, but there is absolutely no sign of how the man died, or how he got there. There is no snow on the man's body, so it clearly hasn't been snowing since he died, but there are no tracks in the snow, besides that of the dog walker and his dog. No footsteps, no drag marks, no tire tracks, no trail of blood and no signs of a struggle. Nothing.
The only clue concerning the man's death is that he has a rather large backpack on his back, and once he opened it, the dog walker was able to determine how the man died. The question is, what was in the backpack?
Yey! Mizal wins! ^_^
Do you have any logic puzzles? I can't think of any good ones right now.
Or an acme anvil. ^_^
That's easy, a grapefruit!
... I've changed my mind. Endmaster wins. ^_^
Two best friends, Lara and Tara, go out clubbing one night. A man hits on them both, but both women reject him. Not one to handle rejection well, the man decides to poison the two women.
Lara is a party girl, and has five drinks in quick succession. Tara is the designated driver, and has only one drink the whole night. However, by morning, Tara is dead, whereas Lara feels fine. The strange thing is, all six of the drinks were poisoned. How is it that the woman who drank more survived, whereas the woman who only had one drink died?
Party girl probably threw everything up after she blew six guys the same night.
Not the answer I was looking for, but I shall certainly consider it a plausible back up. ^_^
I thought I heard this somewhere before.
I'll probably spend the whole day mulling over this, edit this when I got the answer.
Temporary answer: the woman who drank more had poison immunity due to repeatedly ejecting stronger and stroger poisons into herself.
Ah, I remember now.
But do I?
I remember the iced tea, where the poison was in the ice, and the girl drank the drinks so fast before the ice melted,
but you didn't specify it...
I am facing a crisis right now.
No, you're right. It was in the ice! (Though I suppose I should've specified what kind of drinks they were so that you'd know there was ice in it.) ^_^
Hmm... Who knows if the girl who died didn't pass away from other circumstances?
Perhaps she had a heart attack after finding out the drink was poisoned, but the poison was actually not that bad.
Maybe it's a aphrodisiac!
developing poison immunity.
LOL, playing chess with the third sister?
Oh yeah. :p
Why the hell are the sisters reading and playing chess in the kitchen? :p
A man lives on the 10th floor. Every day he goes out, carrying an umbrella. He hates taking the stairs, so every evening when he comes back he takes the elevator up to the tenth. One day he forgets the umbrella, turns right back takes the elevator to the 6th floor and then walks up the four flights of stairs to his apartment to get it.
Is he really short and he needs his umbrella to reach the top button? ^_^
Wait, why would he go back to the 6th floor if he's really short? Why not just turn back to his apartment?
It's a trick question.
He hates taking the stairs and has been jumping out the window using the umbrella to slow his decent.
If he forgot his umbrella one day, he'd be dead when he hit the pavement.
Well my first answer was going to be that he's Mary Poppins. ^_^
I just remembered this one! Much harder than it looks. Took me a couple of attempts to get it. ^_^
Nope, sorry. (Curious how you reached that answer though.)
There is enough data. You have enough info to know what the caterpillar, clock and flowers all are. ^_^
Wrong. Look closer. ^_^
Also, how'd you get the answer? (I want to know what people are doing right and what people are missing out.) ^_^
I got 21, is that right?
Afraid not. ^_^
And here I was, smugly patting myself on the back.
How'd you get to your answer?
By using algebra, basically. I just didn't realize there were more flowers until I saw Northwind's post.
Take a closer look and you might notice even more flowers. ^_^
26? This is tricky
Edit: if that is a flower on the caterpillar's head I'm certain it is 26.
You got it!!! How'd you get the answer though? (Just want to check is you actually are a genius or just had a lucky guess.) ^_^
Well the caterpillar with the flower must be 7, the clocks must be 6, and the flower must be 2. The tricky part came in when I noticed the ones at the bottom were all different. Then I looked at the differences and tried to glean what made them the number they were and if there was any logic to it. The caterpillar had 5 pips and a flower, so that made 7. The caterpillar at the bottom had 6 pips and no flower. The first clock that indicated 6 was also set to 6, so the bottom one must be 5. And the flower was easy. Two of them meant 4. Following PEMDAS, 4 x 5 is 20. 20 + 6 = 26.
Exactly right! You are a genius! ^_^
Math is stupid and you win. ^_^
Thought it was 25 for a second there. Nope.
True, it's definitely 25. Shouldn't have second guessed myself. Here's the original math still on my clipboard, for the curious.
Original picture equations, but as variables:
a+b + a+b + a+b = 21
6 + 6 + a+b = 19
b + 6 + a+b = 15
a + (2b * 5) = ?
3(a + b) = 21
a + b = 7
a + 2b = 9
a + 10b = ?
7 + b = 9 so b is 2 and we quickly figure out a is 5, making a + 20 = 25, which is the answer.
Afraid you missed one little thing.
If you look at the top caterpillars with the flowers in their hair, they all have five dots on their bodies.
If you look at the bottom caterpillar, it has six dots.
The value of the caterpillars depends on how many little dots they have on their bodies. ^_^
Ah. I officially hate this question :)
Still nope. ^_^
I appreciate the offer, but I have a headache. ^_^
Mizal breaks down over complicated riddles: episode 1
Silly mizal! It's not (6 + 4) x 5. It's 6 + (4 x 5) ... At least, that's what the calculator tells me. ^_^
The flower on the head is worth 2, and each pip on the caterpillar's body is worth 1. Count the number of pips on the top caterpillars and on the bottom caterpillar...
Ooh! I have a good one!
Two men enter a building. They then come across a murder. They discuss it, but then a few minutes later, they leave.
Why didn't they call the police?
hey... perhaps they ARE the policemen!
Nope! The answer was that the murder was a painting! The building was an art muesum.
I like my answer better. ^_^
Ngl, that actually would've been a smart answer!
It was a murder of crows? The discussion was, "Weird, how did all these crows get in here?"
Alright. I love words, so I thought this would interest some of yall
What is unusual about the following words: revive, banana, grammar, voodoo, assess, potato, dresser, uneven?
They both have two pairs of letters in them? (Or 3 in the case of grammar and dresser)
Oh! Is it that if you take the first letter away and split down the middle, the letters are reflected on either side?
Basically! What I was originally going for is if you take the first letter and put it on the end, then you get the word reversed!
Ah, that too. ^_^
Ah, the link...
You like potato puns? Yes?
The number of letters goes by the following pattern: 6, 6, 7, 6, 6, 6, 7, 6. Correct me if I'm wrong.
So, I'm assuming the pattern might be apart of the answer.
Hrmm... not exactly...
If you haven't looked at the answer up top yet, I can give you a hint. ^U^
revive, banana, grammar, voodoo, assess, potato, dresser, uneven
revive, banana, grammar, voodoo, assess, potato, dresser, uneven
Hmm... I'm stumped.
Hey, I'll do one for you AL ^U^
revive --> eviver
Oh! I thought that was the answer, but then I felt dumb.
Hey, no worries :)
ananab, rammarg, oodoov, ssessa, otatop, resserd, nevenu
Yes! Now what do all of these have in common?
Try this hint:
Detach and attach
...I'm still stumped. D:
ALright(see what I did there?)
When you detach the first letters of those words, and then put it on the back, then flip the new word around, you get .....(finish it!)
R, b, g, v, a, p, d, u...
U, d, p, a, v, g, b, r...
You might have gotten this already before, and I'm wasting your time....
But this is the answer. When you take the first letter and put it in the back of the word, you get the word reversed :)
B, g, v, a, p, d, u, r
Nevermind, wrong answer. >.>
Shall I walk you through?
You take the word assess, and then take "a" off.
You now have ssess.
You now put the a on the end of this new word. ssessa.
Flip this word around, assess! Cool!
Oh, wait, that's the answer? Smart!
I don't know how I didn't think that, so I'm going to go take an Advil now.
A hunter is on the prowl for a bear. He hikes a mile south. Finding nothing, he then hikes a mile east. Still finding nothing, he hikes a mile north. He then ends up in the same spot that he started in. What color is the bear?
It was reported that Jim Jones married his widow's sister. How?
a man buys apples at $5 a dozen and sells them at $3 a dozen. How did he become a millionaire?
Oh, dang, this is tough. :[
1. White. The guy is at either the north or south pole, which means he must be hunting a polar bear. ^_^
2. Well, if his wife is a widow then he must be dead... Is the sister super into necrophelia?
3. Uhh... He planted the seeds of the first batch of apples and grew apple trees?
Well, technically he was a billionaire that lost a lot of money. But close enough.
I still don't get the second one. How's the guy married if he's dead?
Maybe she was a widow before he married him? And everyone called his wife "Jim's widow" since they knew he was just marrying the old lady for her inherited cash.
Then after she died, he gets the money and can marry her hotter/younger sister.
For the second riddle, Jones married the sister before he died. The riddle doesn't say anything about Jones already being dead when he married the sister, which would be impossible. So he married both his wife and her sister while he was alive, and then he died, making his wife a widow and fulfilling the condition of the riddle.
Oh wait I got one!
So this girl goes to her own mother's funeral and she meets a mysterious guy that she didn't know but immediately falls in love with.
A week later she murders the shit out of her sister.
So what was the motive?
Ooh, I remember this one, but I forgot the answer! D:
So she could see him again?
I prefer my version better.
The sister was a cunt. (Or what Wannabe_Human said)
She fell in love, obviously she was going to get know the guy and see him on the regular.
She committed murder because she didn't want to have an inbred sister/daughter baby by her long lost father.
Oh, right! Darn it, I should've remembered.
That's pretty messed up, though Mr.EndMaster does it well.
Oh! The murder was an abortion! ^_^
Aha! I got a hard one!
You’re rummaging around your great grandmother’s attic when you find five short chains each made of four gold links. It occurs to you that if you combined them all into one big loop of 20 links, you’d have an incredible necklace. So you bring it into a jeweler, who tells you the cost of making the necklace will be $10 for each gold link that she has to break and then reseal.
How much will it cost?
Hint: Not $50
EDIT: You also have to explain how you will do it.
Isn't it weird that both gold links are broken to join them together?
If you start with 2 links OO
And then break one CO
And then attach ∞
I guess it's one?
Oh this is tricky.
You gave the answer when you told the other person it needed to be less than $50. You can do it in $40 if you cut/reseal every link in one of the 5 chains, and use those to connect the other 4.
Welp, my helping was the downfall of this riddle...
I can't imagine how that could create "one big loop of 20 links" though. Also, I was picturing Mr. T the whole time I was imagining this riddle.
Wait, I think I got it.
20 x 10 = 200. So, $200?
Well, that would be equivalent to breaking all the links, and our poor young girl here is low on funds.
So we're trying to find the least cost(less than 50!)
Ho. Another one rummaged up by PerforatedPenguin.
You’re facing your friend, Caryn, in a “candy-off,” which works as follows: There’s a pile of 100 caramels and one peppermint patty. You and Caryn will go back and forth taking at least one and no more than five caramels from the candy pile in each turn. The person who removes the last caramel will also get the peppermint patty. And you love peppermint patties.
Suppose Caryn lets you decide who goes first. Who should you choose in order to make sure you win the peppermint patty?
Choose Marcie, that's a sure way of winning Peppermint Patty.
Oh, this is actually a game on CYS... Can't remember it that well, but I think the other person needs to go first?
Yes, it is! I loved that one :)
Last one from me, I promise.
"There are three hats, each with an accompanying statement.
Hat One: The cat is in this hat.
Hat Two: The cat is not in this hat.
Hat Three: The cat is not in Hat One.
Exactly one of the statements is true. Exactly one hat contains a cat. Which hat contains the cat?"
The answer options are:
1) Hat One
2) Hat Two
3) Hat Three
4) None of the hats
5) Not enough information.
Mizal will know this, afterall, it is cats!
Killa would be excellent in solving this, since he is, in fact, a cat. :]
Hat Two. ^_^
Since only 1 statement can be true:
If statement 1 is true, statement 2 also has to be true, so statement 1 cannot be true.
If statement 2 is true, we must set statement 1 to false. Then statement 3 would become true. So statement 2 cannot be true.
If statement 3 is true, statement 1 must be false. Statement 2 can also be set to false without contradiction. Therefore, statement 3 is the only true statement. The corrected statements would then be:
Hat One: The cat is not in this hat.
Hat Two: The cat is in this hat.
Hat Three: The cat is not in Hat One.
2) The cat is in Hat Two.
If there are 34 including me and you after I enter the garden, and you kill 30, then there are 4 left. I may or may not be among them.
If I see 34 people as I enter the garden, you among them, and I make the total 35, then there would be 5 living after you kill everyone. If you entered after I did, there might even be 6 living.
If you kill 30 bees and not 30 people, there may be 34-36 people still alive. If you kill 30 people outside the garden, and never entered the garden yourself, there would be 34-35 people in the garden depending if I am counted among them.
And if the 34 people in the garden are undead zombies we came into the garden to kill, there might be only 2 living people in the garden at the end of it.
Facebook riddles are usually too ambiguous to answer.
1) Mirrors at side, look sideway.
2) Electric cables.
3) Maybe a spoon to pull the plug, idk. I'd use my hand.
4) Door 3. Lion already starved to death.
5) The letter "m?" Minute and MoMent.
1. ... I don't get it. If both of the girls have mirrors infront of them, then they'll be able to see the reflection of the other mirror, which will have the other girl in it, right?
2. Train tracks?
3. Pull the plug out?
4. Door 3. The lion is dead.
5. The letter M. ^_^
1) The mirrors are on both sides.
3) The drain.
4) Go through the door with the lion. If he hasn't eaten in 3 years, he would be dead by now.
Because no one lives in a fucking garden lol
Maybe it's a cemetery - hence all the zombies that need killing.
Technically there could be either 4 or 5(if you're including yourself that is). However if they are all dead like stated as a possibility earlier than the answer is 1 due to you being living and the zombies being dead.
1, because after you kill 30 people, the other living people are going to run for their fucking lives. ^_^
It mightve also been poison if there was no sign of external damage.
Also I have a logic puzzle(that is not one that I made up):There is a man who murdered his mother. He was born before his father, and married over 100 women without divorcing any one. Yet, he was considered normal by all of his acquaintances. Why?
Time traveling with multiple alternative universes fares pretty normally in a sci-fi setting.
That is technically correct in a way but the answer is much simpler. You need to think more inside the box for this one.
Technically the mother died at childbirth and he was born in front of his father. I don't get the marrying part tbh. Maybe he is a workaholic jack-of-all-trades who is married to his jobs if you use the term "women" loosely. Divorcing doesn't always mean he leaves them forever, he can always come back to them.
You got the father and mother part right. But not the married part. The married part doesnt directly involve himself marrying 100 woman. Thats my last hint before I just outright reveal the answer.
The man is secretly the leader of a smuggling ring and the goods are "his daughters." He "married" 100 of them off. Did I get that right?
I have heard this riddle before. You're on the right track thinking he didn't actually 'marry' the people, but there's another way he can marry people without marrying them...
Hope I didn't give the answer away.
Okay, wife died in childbirth, he was born infront of his father, and he was a priest, so he "married" over 100 couples. ^_^
You are in a mexican standoff, i.e. three-way duel. Problem is that you are not a good shot. You only hit your target a third of the time. One of the other people A, hits half the time, and the third one B never misses. To make things fair you can take the first shot then its A's turn, then B. After that there is another round in the same order, until only one person survives.
What's the best strategy? How high are your chances of survival?
Well logically, they would target the greatest threat to both of them first. In that case you are 100% safe the first round. A has a 50% chance of hitting B and B has a 100% of hitting A. Assuming you also follow this logic you have a 33.3% of hitting B. This raises the chances of you both hitting B. Assume B survives then A is dead. You now have a 33% chance of hitting B/surviving the mexican standoff at that point and a 100% chance of dying if you miss. Now say you shot and killed B than A will likely target you and then has a 50% chance of hitting. If he misses then you have a 33% chance of hitting him. So in this scenario your best chance to survive is to likely let A take out B, A misses and then you shoot him.
The order goes you first (33% to hit), then A (50% to hit), then B (100% hit). Assuming always lethal.
You shoot B. If you even did kill A, B would then always kill you. So it's pretty simple, unless this is a trick question.
I guess you'll shoot B? Then if B dies, at least there'll be less of a likelihood you'll get killed compared to if you manage to kill A, although A shoots first. If B doesn't die, then A would shoot B, and if B still doesn't die, B would kill A and you'll get to shoot next.
Or another strategy might be to shoot away from the both of them, then A would try to shoot B and if A manages to, it'll be the same situation of you against A. However, you will get to shoot first this time. Yet, if A doesn't manage to kill B, B would kill A... then it'll be the same scenario? Although the odds are slightly better since if you face off against A this time, you would get to shoot first.
I'm quite confused, so I didn't add the math in.
Yes this is the right answer. The best solution is to shoot in the air. Then A kills B with 50% probability or B kills A. So this will end up with us facing off against one of them and you have the first shot again.
Oh, I think I know this one!
Basically, if you shoot A and you miss, then A will shoot B, because he has the highest chance of killing him. If A wins, then B is dead and the next round will b you vs A. If A loses then B will kill A because A has the highest chance of killing him in the next round, so the second round will be you vs B.
If you shoot A and you hit him, then B will shoot you, and since he hits 100% of the time, you will die. So, you definitely do not want to kill A.
If you shoot B and miss, then you get the exact same result as if you missed A. You will survive the first round and will either fight A or B in the second round.
If you shoot B and hit him, then A will shoot you, which gives you a 50% chance of dying before you reach the next round. Also not good.
So, the best thing you can do in this situation is miss. So, that solves the problem... All you need to do is shoot into the air. You will miss and then regardless of what happens, you will survive the first round. On the second round, you will still only have a 30% chance of hitting your target but still, it's better than nothing. ^_^
I read this one online some time ago, so the exact wording may be inaccurate.
You are a police officer and have three main suspects: Mary Smith, Matt Smith and Mark Smith. There is only one clue you have, which reveals the name of the killer. However, it is rather confusing as it doesn't give away the first name of the killer... or so you think. Upon further inspection, however, it becomes obvious. The clue tells you to question Smith, but which Smith is it?
The clue: ? Smith
Who is the killer?
Correct! I'm trying to solve your riddle now.
Oh, I get it! Question Mark Smith. ^_^
The serial killer puts three bullets into a revolver in adjacent chambers. The other three chambers are empty. He spins the drum, aims at your head and pulls the trigger. Nothing happens.
“Let's give death one more chance,” he says. “What do you think? Should I just pull the trigger again, or first give the drum another spin?”
If you pull the trigger, you have a 2 in 5 chance of being safe. If you spin, you have an even 3 in 6. 1/2 > 2/5 chance, so spin the barrel.
I'll use a diagram, 000XXX 0=empty and X=bullet. In order for the previous pull to come up empty, it had to have been one of the 0's. If it was the first 0, then the next chamber is empty. If it was the second 0, then the next chamber is empty also. If it was the last 0, then the next chamber is loaded. Therefore, the answer is to pull the trigger again and have a 2/3 chance of survival rather than the 50/50 of spinning the drum again.
Pull the trigger again. If he spins then you have a 50/50 chance that you will die, but if the 3 bullets are in adjacent chambers, then the 3 empty chambers must also be adjacent, which means that there is a 2 in 3 chance that the chamber next to it will also be empty. ^_^
If anyone wants a challenge, here is a link to 100 logic riddles that I posted here several years ago (as a sign of its difficulty level, I was able to solve about 2/3 of the 100 riddles without having to use a walkthrough):
This looks fun! ^_^
Edit: But I got stuck on cucumber barbeque. :'(
A man is on trial for murder. The judge tells him, "If the next thing you tell me is a lie, then tomorrow, you will be hanged. If the next thing you tell me is true, then tomorrow, you will be beheaded." The next day, the man is released.
What did the prisoner say to save himself?
Ooh, this is a good one! But I have no clue.
Not quite, but you're on the right track.
(I suppose this one would work too.) ^_^
"Sure would be a shame if your missing daughter was never found over a little miscarriage of justice like this!"
Sorry Sent, the missing daughter is actually in the Jailor's basement. ^_^
Perhaps I am lying, perhaps I am not...
That's true. The actual answer I was looking for is, "Tomorrow you will hang me" but your answer works just as well. ^_^
He must have told a lie. The next day, he was "released" from the stool or wherever he was being held aloft and then hanged by the rope around his throat.
You have two ropes and a lighter. Each rope takes exactly one hour to burn up, but they do not burn at a constant speed (meaning that cutting one in half will not necessarily guarantee 30 minutes of burn time). Using only these tools, how can you tell when exactly 45 minutes has passed?
You simply ignite one of the ropes on fire on both ends and light the second rope on one end at the same time. When the first rope burns out, 30 minutes have elapsed. At that exact moment, you light the unlit end of the second rope. When that rope burns then 45 minutes have passed
This one crops up in programming interviews with some frequency; I was wondering if it'd show up here.
A few more riddles here. Some may be quite common so there's the chance you may have seen them before.
1) A man went to town on Friday, stayed for three days, and returned on Friday. How is this possible?
2) Two friends entered a room and were standing facing each other. One of them says, "When it turns 12:00 on the clock behind you, you will be stabbed in the back". No one else entered the room behind the friend, and yet the friend got killed. How?
3) You see a hundred people on a boat, but there is not a single person. How is this possible?
4) A man was driving home one night when he received a call from the police. "Your wife has been killed, get to the crime scene immediately," they said. When he arrived, he was arrested. Why?
5) It is the first day of school and a student is found dead during lunch. There were five suspects. The English teacher said he was leading a new student to his class, the Chemistry teacher said she was planning their next lesson with the Biology teacher, the Math teacher said she was marking final exams, the Principal said she was in her office and the History teacher said he was getting lunch. Who killed the student?
Yes, those are all correct!
2. He was stabbed by the hand of the clock.
That's one powerful clock, I have to say.
There are three closed boxes- the first labeled "black", the second labeled "brown", and the last labeled "blond", each containing one strand of hair inside of it. One of the three strands of hair is black, one is brown, and one is blond. Unfortunately, the labels on the boxes are all incorrectly matched to the color of the strand of hair inside of it, and you cannot see what color the strand of hair is without opening the box. How can you rearrange the labels so that each strand of hair is matched with the correct label on its box after opening just one of the boxes?
There is only two possible assignments where each strand is in the wrong box. Opening one box will tell you which one you got.
WARNING: This is a quite lengthy solution.
Here are the boxes:
|Black| |Brown| |White|
Each of these is labeled incorrectly, so (each labeled box has the possibility):
|Black|: Brown or White
|Brown|: Black or White
|White|: Brown or Black
Let's say you open the box labeled "Black". There are 2 seperate cases:
1) There is a brown strand. By process of elimination, you can determine that the black strand is in the white box, and the white strand is in the brown box.
2) There is a white strand. Again, by process of elimination, you can determine that the black strand is in the brown box, and the brown strand is in the white box.
And then after both of these, you can swap the labels out and then you can get all of them in the correct boxes.
In fact, if you open any box, you can determine the color of the strands in the other boxes just using process of elimination.
1) Open any box. Doesn't matter which. Let the box label be color 1. Then find out the color of the strand. Let the strand color be color 2.
2) Find the box with the label that isn't color 1 or color 2.
Ex. If the strand color is brown and you picked the black box, then you would pick the white box. If the strand color is white and you picked the brown box, you would pick the black box.
3) Use process of elimination to determine that the box with the color 3 label has the strand with color 1, and the box with the label of color 2 has the strand of color 1.
So it looks like this:
Label: |color 1| |color 3| |color 2|
Acutal Strand: |color 2| |color 1| |color 3|
And then you can rearrange the labels to make the labels match the strands.
Yes, that's it.
Here's are two puzzles from my story, Dreamtruder. Those of you who read it probably already know the answer:
'On April 29, Mum Eagle was arranging flowers. Dad Eagle was watching the television. Child Eagle was playing with his toy clock. Suddenly, Child Eagle got pulled into the clock, and became a time traveler. He was sucked into the time where his parents were supposed to meet, but accidentally knocked Dad Eagle over when he arrived. However, if he were to completely replace his dad, and the only change in the timeline was that he became the new Dad Eagle, on April 29th in the new timeline, what would Child Eagle be doing now?'
Note: This can be considered a trick question
It depends on which timeline this is in
Playing with the clock
It depends whether Child Eagle refers to the original Child Eagle who became the Dad, or the new Child Eagle
Not enough information is provided
Getting sucked into the clock
There are 7 bears: Panda bear, Polar bear, Grizzly bear, Sunbear, Bespectacled bear, Brown bear and Black bear.
There are also 7 levels of peacefulness and fight skill (1-7, 1 being the lowest, and 7 being the highest). You, the traveler of the Jungle, would want to do one of the following - fight the weakest bear (with a fight skill of 1) or strike a deal with the most benevolent bear (with a peacefulness of 7).
Each bear also has a special skill, which is one of the following: talking to humans, digging a hole, glaring at you, singing, eating mud, paw swipe and falling asleep in the middle of a fight.
The ages of the bears are 10, 11, 21, 35, 49, 53 and 74.
If all the following statements are true, you should be able to identify not every single trait for every single bear, but it should be enough to identify the weakest bear and the most peaceful one.
1) The animal with the ability to talk to humans is the most peaceful
2) The sum of the ages of the Panda and the Polar is equivalent to the age of the Sun Bear
3) The bear with a peacefulness of 5 is 35 years old, and its special skill is to eat mud
4) Subtracting the age of the Bespectacled bear from the Panda results in the age of the Brown bear
5) The bear that sings is 1 year older than the bear the falls asleep in fights
6) The Polar is the 2nd oldest bear
7) The fight skill of the oldest bear is 4, the peacefulness level is 6, and it has the special skill of glaring
8) The age of the Grizzly is 49, and it has a fight skill of 2
9) The special skill of the bear aged 21 is the paw swipe
10) The Polar's special skill is to dig a hole
11) If you order the bears by age (youngest to oldest), their fight skills are as follows: 3, 1, 7, 6, 2, 5, 4
12) Bespectacled bear's special skill is to fall asleep in a fight
The Grizzly bear is the most peaceful, and the Brown bear is the weakest.
Panda bear: 21 years old, paw swipe, fight skill 7
Polar bear: 53 years old, digging a hole, fight skill 5
Grizzly bear: 49 years old, talking to humans, fight skill 2, peacefulness 7
Sun bear: 74 years old, glaring at you, fight skill 4, peacefulness 6
Bespectacled bear: 10 years old, falling sleep in the middle of a fight, fight skill 3
Brown bear: 11 years old, singing, fight skill 1
Black bear: 35 years old, eating mud, fight skill 6, peacefulness 5
There is not enough information to know which of Panda bear, Polar bear, Bespectacled bear, and Brown bear are the ones with peacefulness 1 through 4.
I loved solving those puzzles. Dreamtruder was awesome. Never trust a panda. ^_^
Puzzle 1: Child Eagle wasn't old enough to be knocking off his mom.
Polar A53 F5 P : Dig a hole
Sun A74 F4 P6 : Glaring
Panda A21 F7 P : Paw swipe
Grizzly A49 F2 P7 : Talking to human (Found one)
Besp A10 F3 P : Falling asleep
Brown A11 F1 P : Singing (Found another one)
Black A35 F6 P5: Eat mud
Fight the Brown, Chat up with Grizzly.
You went to the forest and got me. You sat down to seek me. You couldn't find me, so you took me home with you. What am I?
I think it's a splinter.
Thorn and splinter both work.
Q: You are 8 years old. You find a brown-looking website full of words and start reading some of them. Eventually you make an account and decide to join a contest that ended months ago. After declaring your intentions, one of the mods decides that you are simply too stupid to live, and bans you.
Later on in the day, you make another account.
One moderator says you're allowed to stay, as long as you don't post in the forums again.
The other one doesn't really care.
What is the most logical course of action?
A: Immediately out yourself in the same damn thread.
Wait a second!
Is this CYS?
Nothing. Expecting a logical answer from an 8 year old is asking the impossible.
Insist that you are NOT infact the noob that they banned earlier that day and then spam the forums with questions and comments about said noob, asking why he was banned and what he did wrong.
Probably best to necro some several year old threads for good measure. ^_^
I think Thara's onto something, though!
Thanks, miz! I missed CYS. :]
I believe that you still owe me an image, Llama.
I do! I'm really sorry. Luckily, I believe I completed it so I'll send you an image.
Edit: Thank God, it's finished! Sorry for the monthly wait. Hope you like it, though!
I like this. Thanks.
No problem! :]
I like this! Reminds me of a Freddi Fish character
Oh, it's pressure!
Polar bears are supposed to be yellow, but they turn white from the stress of existing in the arctic.
'Cos it ends with "Can you answer this riddle?" I literally thought the answer was "no" :p
A glass mirror?
I was told to put this here: I'm agreeing with others that pressure doesn't work. If you really are stuck on the fact that pressure is a relevant and clever answer to why polar bears are white, then we can talk about the other answers pressure doesn't work for:
I make girls comb their hair - perhaps you mean that low-pressure systems create weather environments that create frizzy hair, thus prompting combing. This seems like a stretch, and I would also recommend brushing rather than combing, but I don't think it works. Mostly because of the lack of pressure being relevant. Scientifically, I think the pressure is caused by temperature regions called cold fronts and warm fronts. Commonly, I think humidity or "weather" would be more likely to be used. Looking at the other answers, I'll give this one to you even though I don't think it works.
I make normal people look like celebrities - how? People who do well under pressure might look like celebrities, but I think "normal people" are more likely to choke under pressure than celebrities. That is sometimes why they are celebrities. Common people can be very good singers, but if they can't do it on stage in front of 1,000s of people, then they can't be a famous singer. What causes these common people to choke is referred to as pressure. I'll agree that it can make a celebrity look stupid if they choke in a live performance, but it is more likely to also make a common person look stupid. If anything it's what separates the two. Okay, I'll concede this one as well... I guess.
I turn pancakes brown - this can be done without pressure. I think direct heat applied to fat or sugar causes browning. Unless you brown your pancakes in a pressure cooker, then this doesn't work. In fact, pressure would ruin the light and fluffy nature of pancakes. You need a lack of pressure to form the air bubbles that make them fluffy. This one really hurts this answer, and we haven't even gotten to the bad ones yet.
If you squeeze me, I'll pop - this implies an object. Pressure can't pop. Pressure does pop things, but you can't "pop a pressure." Pressure is caused by squeezing or compression of some sort. Without some sort of "squeeze," there is never pressure. This is like saying "if you make pressure then the pressure will break." It's a self-defeating statement.
If you look at me you will pop - You can't see pressure. The effects of pressure, maybe, but you can't see pressure. Also, looking at a pressure gauge won't pop you. Pressure could pop you but not from sight. Pressure very much has to be in contact with whatever it is affecting. In fact, pressure needs sort of specific conditions to be created. Looking at it is not one of those conditions.
So sure, polar bears are white because of pressure. You win. Now, take care of these other answers... By the way, air is worse.
Pressure doesn't even have anything to do with polar bears being white.
No, no, they clearly said in the other thread that it was about the air pressure being different at the arctic. Which is just false. Even linked to a news article and everything, that got their sources from an internet forum.
And if it was Selection Pressure, the white fur wasn't because of pressure from another inherently bad trait like selection pressure requires, it was just normal evolutionary natural selection that developed over time as they adapted to their surroundings.
Well, it is sort of a bad trait for a land predator to not blend in with the snow in an environment that potentially doesn't have any trees. Your foes would see you sooner, and you'd waste more precious time running after them!
Not necessarily. I mean, random beneficial mutations just occur. So some bears were living up north, bein bears, and then one day a bear baby is born with white fur. Turns out that it was such a good one that it lived long enough to spread the mutation around. I'm not sure if that really counts as selection pressure, because I'm sure the bears were doing fine before they were white, so there wasn't really any pressure from obvious negative traits. It just sorta happened.
Don't blast bears, bizal. They're an enbangered becies!
But the real question is... Why is it hard to see a baby polar bear in a snow storm? ^_^
There are other contributing factors to that mechanism, however. If the bears had a beneficial mutation, by the nature of living in the forest they would be competing with the un-benefiting bears, eating more, and having more bear babies. The uncamouflaged bears would be out-competed overtime, and the polar bears would be having so many more baby bears by comparison that even the brown and black bears would be running out of non-brown-or-black bears to have brown or black baby bears with and would have to bang the unbigmented bastards.
Your alliteration skills are confusing me, science wizard.
I asked a professional zookeeper (my wife). This is my summary of her answers for you:
Their fur isn't white, it's clear, so the argument is irrelevant. They also have dark skin to stay warm. They only look white to us.
Air pressure doesn't make sense because if their fur was white it would be to stay cool in warm weather which would imply low air pressure, but it isn't a factor at all.
Natural selection pressure is a stretch, but I guess. It is clear to allow sunlight through to their skin to heat it while trapping that heat inside. So, natural selection might be an argument for clear fur for more efficient heating (not camouflage), and that would make them look white to us.
Selection pressure would imply that there used to be many different colors of polar bears or fur color is really important. You would have to show that the survivability of a bear was dependent on camouflage or fur color. That just isn't true.
It also would easily be countered by talking about penguins for predators in arctic climates. A large number of Penguins are black. They don't blend in with anything in the snow. They hunt fish and do quite well on the other end of the world in similar environmental conditions. Polar bears aren't that dependent on being white since they are about the biggest and strongest animal in their food chain.
I believe I said that even if we assume that somehow the polar bear answer works, the answer still can't be pressure. However, polar bears aren't white due to any type of pressure without some disgusting stretch. Again, you could try the "air pressure is higher with cold air systems, so the cold weather (which is why polar bears are white in this argument) would be higher air pressure than a warm climate." You could try for the natural selection approach, but I think you will have more of a stretch and hit more pot holes than the temperature one.
The answer is no or nothing. Nothing fits all of the requirements, and I can't provide a logical answer. What do you look at and suddenly pop? No one would know. Anyone who has seen it would be dead. Of course, unless that means to "explode" with anger. Then I would say discussions about polar bears fur colors. Mizal took one look and "popped."
OK normally I get paid to explain this stuff. If there is a chance of a beneficial mutation then there is also selection pressure. The selection pressure is actually the amount by which the mutation is beneficial
Selection is not about survivability, it is about reproduction, i.e. the number of viable offspring you can produce. The white fur is essential for polar bear predation on land which is in turn essential for reproducing. This has been confirmed in experiments.
Penguins aren't land predators, so they don't worry much about scaring away their prey. However the coats of penguins provide pretty good camoflage in shallow water, and have allegedly evolved for that reason.
The "make girls comb their hair" part and "make normal people look like celebrities" part can be explained as social pressure or peer pressure. It can be argued that girls want to look nice due to peer pressure, and celebrities often start fashion trends that spread due to social pressure to be fashionable. I agree that the other 3 lines make no sense.
Yeah, peer/social pressure makes those two lines work. I can get behind that. It didn't occur to me at the time of writing the previous post though.
comb your hair so you don't get nasty ass knots and clumps in it