It's time to settle this debate once and for all.

[WonkyWarmaiden]

I don't know that!

*gets flung off bridge*

 

[Zombie_Fish]

Wolfram Alpha to the rescue! [http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=How+much+wood+could+a+woodchuck+chuck+if+a+woodchuck+would+chuck+wood%3F]

361.9237001 cubic centimeters of wood a day if my phone is to be believed.(I wouldn't)

Apparently this is actually the right answer. It's from a paper called 'The Ability of Woodchucks to Chuck Cellulose Fibers [http://scientopia.org/blogs/scicurious/2012/10/05/friday-weird-science-how-much-wood-could-a-woodchuck-chuck/]'.

Science!

 

[Grouchy Imp_v1legacy]

Seven cords.

Every voodoo zombie pirate knows that.

[sub]For those of you too lazy to do the maths, that's 896 cubic feet (or a little over 25 cubic metres).[/sub]

 

[Atmos Duality]

"42"

They may have forgotten the question, but we haven't. And we still have the answer.

 

[Noblemartel]

That depends, is it armed?

What kind of equipment does it have or are we talking traditional old school wood chucking?

Considering we're only mentioning the woodchuck, I'd lean towards the interpretation that it's unequipped and only using whatever methods it can with just its physical body.

I actually calculated this once for a maths class. The final solution was in quite wide an area, but it's anything between 7175 to 80085. Another way of calculating it would suggest it could even be as much as 7177135.

By Jove I think you may have blown this case wide open!

 

[AkaDad]

This is a good question. And I don't want to ruffle any feathers. But those who answer 25 are the new Hitler.

25 is a square number. And there is nothing square about woodchucks.

Why do people have to use hyperbole when discussing important matters? They're worst than Hitler.

The answer to the question is found by using the Google.

I'm not your personal answer machine.

 

[Caiphus]

Why do people have to use hyperbole when discussing important matters? They're worst than Hitler.

You're right. I haven't seen any hyperbole yet, though. I'll keep an eye out.

Got your back.

 

[AkaDad]

Why do people have to use hyperbole when discussing important matters? They're worst than Hitler.

You're right. I haven't seen any hyperbole yet, though. I'll keep an eye out.

Got your back.

Thanks, I appreciate that. I don't like to brag, that's why I never bring up the fact that people get my back because I'm the most awesomely awesome person on the internet.

 

[DrOswald]

A woodchuck would chuck all the wood he could chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

So 17.

 

[Eliam_Dar]

there is one factor I need, is he affiliated to a union? numbers can vary from 1 to 16 depending on the answer

 

[Kinitawowi]

How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck would chuck wood?

A woodchuck would chuck no amount of wood since a woodchuck can't chuck wood.

 

[Vigormortis]

A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as it could if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Which is to say none, since they chew wood, not throw it.

 

[Barbas]

A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as it could if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Which is to say none, since they chew wood, not throw it.

What if the woodchuck is chucking the wood back up?

 

[Strain42]

How much wood could a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck would chuck wood?

A woodchuck would chuck no amount of wood since a woodchuck can't chuck wood.

Like fun they can't. My sister's boyfriend's cousin's best friend's dad totally saw a woodchuck chucking wood on the 4th of july after they'd just finished the keg.

Bet you feel silly right now. Can't argue with witness testimony.

Anyway, on topic. I think Woodchucks are CAPABLE of chucking far more wood than they usually do. So we have to remember that whatever number we managed to come up with is probably only a percentage of what they COULD chuck.

 

[Vigormortis]

A woodchuck would chuck as much wood as it could if a woodchuck could chuck wood.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Which is to say none, since they chew wood, not throw it.

What if the woodchuck is chucking the wood back up?

Ah, a fair point. Gross, but fair.

But even so, does not the woodchuck need to chew the wood before it can then (up)chuck it?

 

[JoJo]

Both sides are wrong, the answers clearly somewhere in the middle, I'm betting on 24.5 with a margin of error of 0.2 on each side.

 

[Padwolf]

Is it an African or European woodchuck?

Good question.

Yes, what is the woodchuck's airspeed velocity?

These are the pertinent questions, there are so many variables.

But also, we are missing the most important one of all; is this woodchuck real or is it all part of our imagination? And if it's real, then does it have friends?

 

[EHKOS]

What if the woodchuck doesn't WANT to chuck wood. What about his DREAMS, his DESIRES. It's HIS life not yours!

 

[Godhead]

Is the woodchuck modified in anyway? Say it now has a chainsaw for arms and is fuelled by human flesh?

 

[Something Amyss]

Are we talking per hour, per day, per year? Perhaps a lifetime of chucking?

Quite frankly, if you take into count wind speed, the hardness of the wood, and the size of the woodchuck, it's pretty obvious the number is closer to 42. Which is exactly what Douglas Adams said it would be, and what Einstein would have pointed to in Grand Unified Field Theory if he hadn't been murdered by the Woodchuck Illuminati.

Oh God, you're not one of those conspiracy theorists, are you? Albert Einstein was a myth created by the lumber union!

This is a good question. And I don't want to ruffle any feathers. But those who answer 25 are the new Hitler.

25 is a square number. And there is nothing square about woodchucks.

You know who disliked squares? THE NAZIS! You never see one of their tanks run on square wheels, do you? And do you know who was in charge of the Nazis? It was....I forget, but I think his name started with an R!