1. John Hancock

The fact that everyone knows who this man is is beyond me. Of course he was an important man in his time, serving as Governor of Massachusetts for a time, as well as being the President of the Continental Congress. People don’t remember these kinds of things though, and the only thing people can tell you about the man is that his signature was big and fancy on the Declaration of Independence. People view it as a bold statement of rebellion and treason against King George, and it is seen as an act of true patriotism. This could be the case, but it could also be complete garbage. The position of President of the Continental Congress actually gave him the chance to sign the Declaration of Independence first, so it could be that he signed the document with such a large signature because he didn’t know what size to make his name since he had no frame of reference. This man is mainly known in American history as the guy who wrote his name big and bold like an Odyssey headline (shameless plug), and it may have been a complete accident? If that’s the case, what an easy way to get recognition when it’s not deserved.

2. Napoleon Bonaparte

A lot of times you’ll hear people comparing genius military commanders like Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and Napoleon Bonaparte among many others. These men excelled in taking lands, winning battles, and having disciplined forces in the palm of their hands. I’ll give Napoleon credit for being an intimidating force even though he was only five-foot seven-inches because us short guys have to stick together, but he was nowhere near as dominant in battle as you would expect someone well-known like Napoleon to be. Most of the famous commanders never lost encounters, but Napoleon lost three that we know of: Caldiero, Aspern-Essling, and Waterloo, to name a few. If those don’t stain his reputation enough, he also had a Russian campaign that started with 400,000 men but only ended with 10,000. An effective general, emperor, King, or commander would not lose 98% of their units in route to a victory. Was he good? Sure. Was he impressive enough to be a common household name? Not by a long shot.

3. Andy Warhol

I appreciate the artistic community as much as the next guy, but sometimes I get rubbed the wrong way by certain artists (except Bob Ross, who is someone I would love to have deep life talks with). One of the most recognizable names in art history is Andy Warhol, a man known for artwork I honestly find unimpressive. Someone is forever famous for making art of a tomato soup can, which isn’t even edible (lame). Doesn’t that sound so silly? And all the pieces that were just pop art of famous faces might have been cool at the time, but now we have thousands of photo filters on our phones that can create the same exact thing. So I just sit and wonder how exactly am I supposed to think this guy’s work was impressive if I can take snapchats more aesthetic than his entire life’s work?

4. Charles Darwin

Known as the “Father of Evolution”, people quote ideas from Charles Darwin more than that one line from God’s Plan (and you’re probably thinking of it in your head right now), but Darwin obviously wasn’t the first person to think that we could have evolved from a different species. Even though he wasn’t the originator of this belief, we still give him credit like it was completely his own idea. Sure, he expanded on a lot of the ideas presented before him and established his work through published works, but would you give credit for toilet paper to the person who uses it? Didn't think so. And maybe this isn't similar at all to this scenario, but the logic makes sense. If you use something made for your benefit, should you be praised for benefiting from its use? Confused yet? So am I.

5. Christopher Columbus

This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that knows the truth about the man’s journeys in the new world. Some credit him with sailing to the west, proving the roundness of the Earth and becoming the first Europeans in the Americas, but all of this is technically false when you take a step back. Plato and Aristotle already concluded that the Earth was round more than 1600 years earlier, but they proved this through scientific and philosophical analysis. Columbus and his crew were not the first Europeans in the Americas because it can be supported that Vikings made their way to the lands over 500 years earlier. Finally, he never actually sailed to the current-day United States, he instead hit many Caribbean islands, and he swore he was in India the entire time. All of his accomplishments were basically bogus, and yet there is a federal holiday named after him. How does this make any sense? I guess it was the thought that counts. Either that or lawmakers wanted another day off from work, which I don’t mind at all. I know the truth and I still get to celebrate the holiday in honor of an overhyped explorer.