37 Responses

  1. Matt at |

    Inspiring hitler doesn’t have anything to do with why HE HIMSELF is horrible hitler was also catholic so by that logic Catholicism caused the holocaust

    Reply
    1. Logan at |

      Hitler wasn’t Catholic, Catholicism demands faith to be justified by good works and Hitler shows he had neither but operated on a scale of anti-christ by using religion to inspire his works as an evil means to a wicked end.

      And, no, inspiring Hitler doesn’t make that person was evil, Hitler was just looking for a twisted justification for his deeds like he twisted Nietzsche’s works as well.

      Reply
      1. redstick at |

        “Ford wrote on May 22, 1920: ‘If fans wish to know the trouble with American baseball they have it in three words—too much Jew.'”

        “In Germany, Ford’s anti-Semitic articles from ‘The Dearborn Independent’ were issued in four volumes, cumulatively titled “The International Jew, the World’s Foremost Problem”, published by Theodor Fritsch, founder of several anti-Semitic parties and a member of the Reichstag”.

        quotes from the Wikipedia article “Henry Ford”.

        That said, Ford was more of an ‘arm-chair’ anti-Semite, than a real rabble-rouser. After the War, when confronted with the realities of the Holocaust, he was utterly horrified. Possibly as a result, he soon after suffered his final stroke.

        Reply
  2. Theodoros II at |

    No joke I was just about to “complain” and ask why you included Cameron in such list and then I read this “(he) convinced people to pay $15 to see Dances With Blue Aliens. If that’s not genius, we don’t know what is” and I laughed my a$$ off LMAO. You are so RIGHT!!!!!!!
    But let’s be honest Cameron ain’t no genius, he is just sneaky and deceived us with this one hehe.

    However that’s an awesome list. Good job!

    Reply
  3. 5minutes at |

    A lot of this list is guilt by association. Inspiring Hitler isn’t saying much, since Hitler had tons of inspiration, much of it good ideas from good people. It took Hitler to pervert those ideas.

    I’d also like to add that the excuse made to include Aristotle on this list is faulty. The fact is that his own country – Greece – is not only not the same as the counter-point nation – Sparta, it’s also not even comparable in timeframe. The whole “only Spartan women give birth to real men” line was 150 years old by Aristotle’s time, when Sparta was in a pretty serious and precipitous decline in comparison to the rest of the Greek world. In the end, his views mirrored the beliefs of many, many societies.

    Let’s also be honest – the idea that women should be subservient to men is not a uniquely Aristotean belief. Historically, it’s more difficult to find societies where women (who are typically physically weaker than men) were not subservient.

    Reply
    1. redstick at |

      But only Aristotle is Aristotelian. He was THE go-to guy during the so-called ‘Middle Ages’. If Aristotle wrote it, it was gospel. Period.

      He even wrote that women had fewer teeth than men. He couldn’t even be bothered to look in his wife’s mouth.

      Reply
      1. 5minutes at |

        I’m not thinking Middle ages, I’m thinking Aristotle’s contemporaries. His beliefs, however influential they were, were not unique – they were reflective of commonly accepted beliefs.

        And yes, he claimed (or at least the translations of his works claim) that women have fewer teeth. That makes him a pretty poor scientist, but that’s really about it. Plus, I possibly could argue that, linguistically, he may have been trying to say that women have smaller teeth than men, but even if the translations are correct, in context, he wasn’t saying “women have fewer teeth than men therefore women are to be abused by men” – he was just, poorly, trying to make a scientific commentary after failing to actually observe what he was reporting on.

        Meanwhile, he also said that no animal – including man – sheds its molars. He also said this gem of a scientific observational failure: “The Egyptian hippopotamus has a mane like a horse, is cloven-footed like an ox, and is snub-nosed. It has a huckle-bone like cloven-footed animals, and tusks just visible; it has the tail of a pig, the neigh of a horse, and the dimensions of an ass.”

        Reply
  4. Big J in PA at |

    #2 is REAL thin….most actors are pretentious douchebags, why hold Cameron to a god like standard? and whats the back story on him nailing phones to the wall? Maybe it was cause he’s trying to FILM A MOVIE and they wont stop yapping to their friend about what kind of latte they had that morning…and so what if people think he’s an egotistical jerk, ONLY someone with an ego that big can pull off films of his caliber…I never thought in a million years I’d be the guy defending James Cameron, but it seems that post is based more on jealousy than anything substantial….he may a bit of a jerkwad, agreed, but calling him out on a list of “horrible people” might be a bit of a stretch

    Reply
    1. marc at |

      Why even bring up Titanic (ha ha, see what I did there?) when Cameron directed Aliens, a movie franchise that has spawned role playing games, video games, sequels, a whole genre of “space marines vs. aliens” fiction, and is one of the most influential and easily in the top 10 best action films of the 80’s?

      Aliens, dude. That movie is far more important in the scheme of film than Titanic. He may not have taken it as seriously, but it is a MUCH more important movie.

      And evey one knows Lenon was a douche.

      Jeeze, almost anyone of incredible talent and or intelligence is a douche.

      Reply
  5. dude at |

    this is by far the worst list i have seen on this site

    Reply
  6. David at |

    Cameron nailed people’s phone to the wall if it rang during filming… good for him. As for Ego… he made the two highest grossing films of all time, like it or not, he’s earned it.

    Reply
  7. Skeptic at |

    Dawkins said something douchey once doesn’t make him a “shockingly horrible” person. You must have had to stretch a good ways to make this list.

    Reply
  8. Ride The Sky at |

    So in essence you are saying that James Cameron is only one spot below a man that directly inspired Hitler? Don’t get me wrong I know all about Camerons douchy behavior, but come on nailing a phone to a wall compared to the holocaust doesn’t seem like they belong on the same list……..

    Reply
  9. AReader at |

    Please proofread your articles prior to posting. It’s a site where people read articles. Even if we disagree about the validity of the items, the least that can be done is make sure that the sentences are complete and not missing words. It’s just basic editing.

    Reply
    1. Edie at |

      The author also made a mistake in his first paragraph….Einstein didn’t invent GRAVITY..Issac Newton did.

      Kind of hard to take anything as TRUTH after that huge mistake…lol

      Reply
      1. Anonymous at |

        What? He didn’t invent gravity,gravity was always there

        Reply
  10. Dr. Matthew D. Zarzeczny, FINS at |

    Interesting article. Speaking of Wikipedia, that site is one that itself was an arguably genius idea, but with “horrible people” doing some of the “editing”. Check out the edits of http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?limit=50&tagfilter=&title=Special%3AContributions&contribs=user&target=TTN&namespace=&tagfilter=&year=2013&month=-1

    That editor’s entire edit history consists of indiscriminately trying to get articles removed from Wikipedia, despite being reprimanded for it: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3ATTN

    In fact, Wikipedia has a whole cabal of editors called “Deletionists”, who are in effect electronic book burners. That TTN account is just the tip of the ice berg of accounts with an agenda on that site! There are others that have made outrageously despicable and grotesque edits to promote their sometimes even shockingly bizarre viewpoints that I am not even comfortable linking to!. At least with the deletionists, they can be disrupted by arguing to keep in all of their discussions and adding more sources to articles. Yet, what they do is also create a bunch of accounts to back themselves up in arguments. Some have even taken to harassing editors off site. I recall reading of instances where editors have contacted people’s work, called police on bogus reports, etc. So, to everyone, please be careful with Wikipedia, some people are on a crusade to cut it down to only cover what Britannica would cover, others are out to make articles express a specific viewpoint, and still others may even come after other editors who disagree with them!

    Reply
    1. marc at |

      thankfully TN only seems to be interested in vandalizing wiki articles that are of no real importance. Most of them are about Marvel comics, the Transformers or other works of fiction.

      Maybe TTN has mistaken wikipedia for Encyclopedia Dramatica?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_Dramatica

      https://encyclopediadramatica.es/Encyclopedia_Dramatica:About

      Reply
  11. Deacon at |

    Forgot Steve Jobs!

    Reply
  12. Jerry at |

    Seriously? Nikola Tesla? The man was smarter than the other 9 on the list! SMH. Compared to the others on the list eugenics seems like the lesser crime…..

    Reply
  13. ZimbaZumba at |

    You put together a whole webpage to make a thinly veiled attack on Dawkins, Wow,

    Reply
  14. joedoe at |

    in line with the logic expressed above, Nietszche and Wagner were Nazi too.

    Reply
  15. Lucas Bernhardt at |

    Well, I agree that Nietzsche wasn’t, but Wagner was a greedy adept of nazi perspective.

    Reply
  16. Lucas Bernhardt at |

    I would say:

    Thomas Edison
    Field Of Awfulness: Thomas Edison

    Reply
  17. Jill at |

    Nikola Testla’s view on eugenics is more like something “amoral” though since he never mentioned anything about how humanity should carry out eugenics. Is that through mandatory means? By oppression? Or is it voluntary? Would it be carried out using artificial or alternative means? We can’t tell. The article doesn’t tell us anything.

    It would seem to me that Tesla’s support on Eugenics is more like a “concern” for the future of humanity since he’s a well known perfectionist. He is known for being a bit of an antisocial though and he even commented that the only good women does is to rip him away from his work.

    Reply
  18. JAKE at |

    dawkins made the list for a internet blog comment?..

    he was right anyways…the chicks gonna bitch and moan online cause a guy tryed to pick her up in an elevator….there ARE alot worse things that could of happend.

    Reply
  19. Dennis S at |

    Lennon was a Genius? Who knew? Another blunder in the list is that Aristotle never existed.

    Reply
  20. Lis at |

    Well written article. A little sensationalist at times, but some interesting facts in there that I never knew.

    Reply
    1. Lottie at |

      I wouldn’t take any of it as “fact”, when it follows the ridiculous claim that Einstein “invented gravity”. Anyone who would publish such an idiotic statement doesn’t give one flip about facts.

      Reply
  21. Kelly Quadracci at |

    Being smarter than most is extremely challenging.

    Reply
    1. TopTenz at |

      true

      Reply
      1. Lottie at |

        Top Tenz — How would you know?

        Reply
  22. Lottie at |

    Wow! Exaggerated claims with no citations (linking to yourself as a source doesn’t count), remarks taken out of context and misrepresented, apparently no fact checking whatsoever, spin, spin and more spin, all following the idiotic claim that Einstein “invented gravity”. Only extremely feeble-minded people would take any of this tripe at face value. But, of course, the feeble-minded are a tabloid’s bread and butter.

    For the record, Richard Dawkins was responding to this quote from Rebecca Watson’s (aka Skepchick) very own vlog where she described the elevator incident and quoted the alleged sexist as saying to her, “Don’t take this the wrong way, but I find you very interesting, and I would like to talk more. Would you like to come to my hotel room for coffee?”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rebecca_Watson#Elevator_incident

    THAT is what Watson called sexual harassment and/or sexism, and her claim is what Dawkins objected to. I object to it as well because it minimizes and trivialized the plight of true victims, and I’m glad that someone had the guts to challenge Watson. I only wish Dawkins hadn’t been bullied into apologizing for it.

    As to John Lennon, here is the full quote regarding violence against women:

    PLAYBOY: “Getting Better.”

    LENNON: It is a diary form of writing. All that “I used to be cruel to my woman, I beat her and kept her apart from the things that she loved” was me. I used to be cruel to my woman, and physically — any woman. I was a hitter. I couldn’t express myself and I hit. I fought men and I hit women. That is why I am always on about peace, you see. It is the most violent people who go for love and peace. Everything’s the opposite. But I sincerely believe in love and peace. I am not violent man who has learned not to be violent and regrets his violence. I will have to be a lot older before I can face in public how I treated women as a youngster.”

    http://www.recmusicbeatles.com/public/files/bbs/jl_yo.playboy/lennon4.html

    Yes, what he did was despicable! But it’s rare to see someone who behaves that way, later showing enough self awareness and regret to publicly admit how awful it was. That doesn’t excuse the violence, but I think it should excuse Lennon from being described as a “shockingly horrible person”. I mean, how many abusers ever take responsibility for their actions, AND go on to advocate for women and the feminist movement itself?

    There are other people whose lives have been misrepresented here, and others have already pointed that out. I think whoever wrote this piece should be added to the list of “shockingly horrible people” for misrepresenting the facts of other people’s lives and thoughtlessly attacking people’s character — especially people who can no longer defend themselves — solely for the sake of site hits. True bottom-feeders, the lot of you.

    Reply
    1. Shell Harris at |

      Everything was sourced from third-party sites, check the links again. We don’t link to ourselves as a source. We add links to our other articles as a matter of courtesy on certain keywords and phrases, not for citing sources. I’m glad you found this article worth reading and commenting on. Thanks for adding more information; we always appreciate it when our readers get involved.

      Reply
  23. Lottie at |

    “In a similar vein, there are other geniuses from a variety of respective fields that are, or were, straight-up awful people, despite how little attention people pay to that fact.”

    “Straight-up awful” is entirely subjective and, therefore, does not qualify as “fact”, by definition. Apparently the people running this site wouldn’t recognize a fact if it slapped them across their collective faces.

    Reply
  24. Lottie at |

    RE: Virgina Woolf

    Woolf’s attitude toward reading and learning was not uncommon amongst the “leisure class” of her time. Heck, even today, many elitists believe that higher education is a privilege that should be reserved for those who can pay for it.

    As to her “talking smack” about her servants in her private diaries, is that really more “shockingly horrible” than belittling people to their faces? Lots of people vent in private journals. It can be therapeutic, which brings me to my next point:

    Did you know that Virginia Woolf was mentally ill? “Much scholarship has been made of Woolf’s mental illness, described as a “manic-depressive illness” […]”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Woolf#Mental_illness

    “The sudden death of her mother in 1895, when Virginia was 13, and that of her half-sister Stella two years later, led to the first of Virginia’s several nervous breakdowns. […] The death of her father in 1904 provoked her most alarming collapse and she was briefly institutionalised.[5] Modern scholars (including her nephew and biographer, Quentin Bell) have suggested[8] her breakdowns and subsequent recurring depressive periods were also influenced by the sexual abuse to which she and her sister Vanessa were subjected by their half-brothers George and Gerald Duckworth.”

    “Throughout her life, Woolf was plagued by periodic mood swings and associated illnesses. She spent three short periods in 1910, 1912 and 1913 at Burley House, 15 Cambridge Park, Twickenham, described as “a private nursing home for women with nervous disorder”.[9] Though this instability often AFFECTED HER SOCIAL LIFE [emphasis mine], her literary productivity continued with few breaks throughout her life.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Woolf#Early_life

    Woolf’s condition eventually deteriorated to the point that “On 28 March 1941, Woolf put on her overcoat, filled its pockets with stones, walked into the River Ouse near her home, and drowned herself.”

    Before killing herself, she included the following lines in a note to her husband:

    “Dearest, I feel certain that I am going mad again. I feel we can’t go through another of those terrible times. And I shan’t recover this time. I begin to hear voices, and I can’t concentrate. So I am doing what seems the best thing to do. You have given me the greatest possible happiness. You have been in every way all that anyone could be. I don’t think two people could have been happier till this terrible disease came.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virginia_Woolf#Death

    All this to say that many people suffering mental illness experience difficulty and even anxiety during face-to-face communication with other people — IT AFFECTS THEIR SOCIAL LIVES. This could very well be the reason she left notes for her servants. That, in no way, qualifies someone as a “shockingly horrible person”. However, anyone who would willfully ignore these readily available facts, and describe a mentally ill person as “shockingly horrible” for possibly being unable to face people, AND implying that she is not an “actual human being” because of it, most definitely belongs on this list!

    Shame on you for attacking the entire character of people based on a few cherry-picked facts about their lives taken completely out of context just to boost your site hits. If you have a shred of integrity or even human decency, you will remove this article at once and post a public apology for your shockingly horrible character assassinations.

    Reply
  25. Holden at |

    Dawkins told Rebecca Watson to stop whining, and this makes him a shockingly horrible person? lol Biased list is biased. Stopped reading there.

    Reply

Leave a Reply