Good pictures, but why did they have to be titled "wierd"? They are photos of things that happened. Nothing there is inexplicable. Why a photo of Elvis in the army, or Charlie Chaplin is 'wierd' I don't know. Did the person posting them (not you Buggi, the person who compiled them) think Charlie Chaplin was born with a moustache and bowler hat?
Annoying isn't it ?
Everything seems to be "click bait" these days. "5 weird facts", "1 weird tip", "most bizarre photo ever" etc.
At least the "bizarre" photos linked above were interesting.
Still it could be worse, before this it was "search engine optimisation". I was reading about a journalist who had to write the headline for Michael Jacksons death for a news paper website, the brief was that it had to include the key words"Michael Jackson", "dies" and "dead".
Headline "Michael Jackson dies: star found dead at home"
Rubbish headline but what else could you do.