<p>Oh well @ the Jamestown/St. Augustine Q, that was kind of a cheap shot, same with the Railroad Q..</p>
<p>yeah i hate the trivia ones....</p>
<p>I opened up a can of worms. Sorry. You guys probably dont need to worry at all.</p>
<p>there was nothing wrong with the railroad question, pittsburgh was around and well established beforehand whereas chicago not so much</p>
<p>Not at all GinPA, it was actually the other way around, Pitt was just a Fort before, and then a little town, it attacted MILLIONS of workers b/c of their railroad and growing industry b/c of it. Chicago had the Erie Canal near it and therefore was prospering from trade, hence a larger/ more established city. It was a bad question.</p>
<p>it was definitely florida...Id bet my life on it. :-)</p>
<p>but, in general, Chicago's growth was spurred b.c.of RRs to a greater extent, and it experienced the most growth b/c of it, even if Pittsburgh grew as well.</p>
<p>Yea but Pitt was NOTHING without the RR, it then became known as the Steel Town or w/e, and became a boomtown, Chicago was already established, yea it got bigger, and was known as the transportation capital or w/e, but I feel like the RR had the single greatest impact on Pitt, cuz w/o it it would have been nothing. Oh well, its a bad question and you guys are probably right.. err</p>
<p>In 1840, Chicago was not in the top 10 most populated cities, and had less then 23,000 people. In 1870, after the RR boom, they city was 4th and had 299,000 people. Pittsburgh only grew to about 139,000 during that time.</p>
<p>yeah...Chicago.</p>
<p>nah the railroad question wasnt a bad question if you use common sense (which many intelligent people seem to lack). The railroad as a whole increased travel to the west. Its one of the first things said in the review books and im sure its in every us history textbook in existence. Chicago is in the west...and would reach its greatness ultimately because of the railroad. If you picked pittsburg....you over thought the question way to muchh. its only one question besides</p>
<p>Chicago was a terminal for everything west, whereas Pittsburgh had Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinatti, Ft. Wayne and Detriot further west, where the railroad effected growth greatly.</p>
<p>EDIT: and St Louis, Indianapolis, Knoxville, Columbus(KY), Cairo(IL)</p>
<p>Wow, my dad is watching TV, I turn around randomly to see a commericial, and it says "I love chicago" I think you guys must be right.. haha.. no joke either</p>
<p>haha...there you go Mtl. </p>
<p>Any other questions that should be discussed?</p>
<p>There was a lot of controversy about that poll Q earlier, between too small a poll and biased for the answers... I said 5% was too small of a poll</p>
<p>Also, the closest the Erie Canal was to Chicago was between Fort Wayne and Terre Haute, Indiana. Chicago only had a short canal line from it.</p>
<p>I also answered too small of a group, I dont see any relevance to biased attitudes, meaning you cant get that from the question.</p>
<p>yeah, I guess everything logically points to Chicago.</p>
<p>Yea I felt like the phonebook/car bias doesn't really limit the pool that much, and 5% leaves 95% of the population unaccounted for.. I dono its another semi-ambiguous question</p>
<p>I put the survey wasn't big enough too, but I think the biased thing made more sense because the ppl surveyed all had luxury goods or something.</p>
<p>Can someone update the consolidated list?</p>