Suppose someone asks the question:  How long ago did humans evolve from monkeys?  Since humans did not evolve from monkeys, this question is unanswerable as it is based on a misunderstanding of the concept of human evolution. Is there a technical word for these types of questions founded in a misunderstanding of a concept?  As in you would respond to this by saying:  I cannot answer that because you've asked me a _______ question.
261
For example, if I ask someone "What does it feel like to be a gay Christian?" I'm suggesting that the person to whom I'm asking is gay and Christian, neither of which may be true.
56973
For example, this question might be offtopic. But where it is not?
117878
Someone said a word, or saying, to me that I didn't know the meaning, so I looked it up.  I cannot remember what it was, but the meaning was:     "Something good comes from something that was bad"   For example, I crashed my car into a beautiful woman's car and we then dated.  Please can someone tell me the word I'm looking for. I think it is two words, each with two syllable's.  Thanks for any help anyone can give.
60975
Imagine a scenario where Jim provides a piece of information to Sue. Jim believes this information to be true and correct, but is later proven to be mistaken. Some might say that Jim lied to Sue. I believe this to be the wrong word, because the misinformation was unintentional.  Is there a better word for this type of unintentional "lie"?
37902
I really dont know how to describe this. Im having a discussion with someone, I was sharing information that I found on a topic. Randomly im called out as being rude when nowhere was there evidence of rudeness exchanged. This person seems to have a history of claiming people have a problem or are being rude out of the random blue.   Is there a word to describe these random accusations that dont connect to anything?
51382
I came across some scenarios like these:     Case 1: Obviously not true       Q: Why does the sun rise and fall every day?   A: Because the Earth .   A2: Because .     Case 2: Letting the OP do what is declared not to       Q: How can I charge my phone without a charger?   A: Try the USB ports on your computer.   A2: Go buy a charger.    Case 3: Attempt to joke (despite looking like a real answer)       Q: What's this round bird in bright red? [An image]   A: It may be a rare or mutated species of sparrow.   A2: It's a .   A3: It's an .    Should I flag A2/A3 as NAA in those cases?
29912
I don't know how many of you have experienced the  principle when posting questions on SO, but I know I have on a few occasions. And then I just discard my question. So here's the question:  Should we go ahead and post the question?  Of course if it's something stupid like forgetting a semicolon, etc., I would say no... but there are several occasions, like if a data structure doesn't make sense, that at least someone would eventually benefit from the question/answers.  And if you should ask the question, how would you recommend choosing an answer for it?
117300
Theory isn't the right word because my "theory" is nothing but an idea that works for me that would take forever to explain. Actually, explaining my "theory" is exactly why I need the word :) Since the subject is creation, I don't want to call my "theory" that word because it's completely non-scientific, hardly salt to the Theory of Evolution's pepper.  Belief isn't the right word either. Again, my thing doesn't rise to that level. I believe in global warming, evolution, apple pie and that Jon Snow will live until (maybe even THROUGH) the end! I don't believe in God in any sense that I've ever heard preached or that I've read. Faith doesn't work either. The word "faith" fits better to the Jon Snow reference above.  My degree of certainty that my "theory" is correct is kind of nil. I guess I can describe it as something my scientific psyche can accept and that makes me feel warm and fuzzy. I'd like to think my thingy is right.  So, what can I call it?
101513
I heared somewhere, I cannot remember where, that there has not been an evolution observed in our lifetime. In life science class, right at the start, we was doing the usual MRSGREN (how to tell if something is a living organism), and the tutor said that you can also tell something is a living organism if it evolves. So I asked if there has been an observed evolution in our lifetime. She said that there had been many but could not recite any off the top of her head, so the next week she handed me a piece of paper with 8 or so websites that aparrently corroborated her claim. I have not got the paper anymore but I recall there been on there the peppered moth or something. So I set out to look for a chronological list of evolution but could not find an authoritative one. I could only find something on wikipedia that indicated that species have been dying out for the past thousand years, but nothing saying that any have evolved.
16090
Is answering beyond the scope of the question a valid thing? Or should we just stick to the question asked and ignore any potential bugs which might be present (of course OP is unaware of that, as of now).  To make myself more clear, please have a look at this .  There are 3 answers which talk about the issue asked and that's it. If you look at my answer, I've added an additional point about a potential bug which the OP has missed now (may find out later). So is it a good thing to point out such potential bugs or not? Should this practice be encouraged?
122357
OK, so I'm trying to complete the following analogy:     John ate the worms.   is to     The worms were eaten.   as     John tried to eat the worms.   is to     The worms were tried to be eaten.   or     The worms were eaten attemptively.   ... ? I feel like such an inarticulate fool sometimes.  Edit: I'm not asking which of the two possibilities is better, but how I might complete the analogy, preferably with "the worms" as the subject. This is so that I can write something like     The worms were stolen, taken to John's house, and [tried to be eaten].   Sorry if my question wasn't clear.
19551
Regarding , made by me, and general questions in this matter. I did receive decent answers on the question that was asked, but it wasn't asked clear enough by me I now see. I do not want to invalidate the answers by completely restructuring the question. Should one post a new question ignoring the other? or Should one refer to their old post and writing a short &quot;because x I reposted this...&quot;?
47152
Most paradoxes involves self-reference, the only exception known to me is Yablo's paradox, however it is still debated if it is really without self-reference. So, I was wondering, are there other known paradoxes that works without self-reference?
48475
I saw this question:   I don't know what the best option is for dealing with such a question, because I've seen questions like this several times already.  So, what should we do with questions that are:   poorly asked finally answered by the OP as an update to the question itself, not as an answer.
37108
While programming I often have naming questions, such as "how do I name [thing]  in a descriptive but succinct way? Is there already an accepted terms for this/an alternative to [name]?" (Thing could be a programming concept, a function, a class, a variable)  Is Stack Overflow the right place to ask these naming/semantics questions?  I would like to be able to get meaningful answers, not just "Name it [name] and call it a day."
45201
I'm a non-native speaker completely stuck trying to formulate a negative question. Full disclosure: I'd like to use it as a title for a university paper and I could not find any help around.  This is the question/title:     Why did the Industrial Revolution did not occur in China during the Ming/Qing period?   I highlighted the sources of my doubts.  In the title I'd like to ask why the Industrial Revolution (which happened in Britain) did not happen (during the same period) in China.  Should I rather say     Why did the Industrial Revolution not occur in China during the Ming/Qing period?   Thank you in advance  Edit: maybe this question should belong to "english language learners"
6104
In discussions about the meanings of words I often find participants bring up the etymologies as though they are conclusive deciding factors.  On the other hand there is concept of the "etymological fallacy" .  Which is true? Or is the truth somewhere between? If words change over history how relevant is their origin to their current meaning? If the etymology of a word is a trump card which can settle debates about correct usage of words does this mean words cannot in fact change over time?