Most annoyingly, Varasdi gives NO references for anything.  He does list a bibliography (which itself contains an error!) but doesn't link any particular point to a source.  I'll try to do better.

I will be writing Mr. Varasdi to inform him of this page's existence, and will happily either make his rebuttal available here, or provide a  link to it if available elsewhere.

 The book takes the form of a paragraph or two on a set of alphabetically-ordered topics, with Mr. Varasdi's "correction" of popular misconceptions about them.  I'll rebut some of them here, in the same order.
 
 

 Aggravate
 Airplane tire wear
 Aisle
 Alumni
 American Revolutionary War
 Antarctica
 Appleseed, Johnny
 Aristotle
 Armor suits
 Bacteria
 Bald eagle
 Basketball
 Bees collecting honey
 Billion
 Boiling point
 Bulls seeing red
 Cabinet
 Columbus, Christopher
 Crickets
 Daddy longlegs
 Darwin, Charles
 Dinosaurs
 Donkeys, mules, jackasses and asses
 Drinking straws
 Ears
 Earth is round
 Edison, Thomas
 Electoral college
 Frozen foods
 Giraffes
 Glass
 Green apples
 Hay fever
 Immaculate conception
 Incest
 Jellyfish
 Jesus as a carpenter
 Largest animal
 Moths
 Perspiration
 Plague, The  [sic]
 Pony
 Prepositions at the end of a sentence
 Shark attacks
 Shriveled skin
 Skull
 Snakes
 Speed of sound
 Spiders
 Star of David
 Statue of Liberty
 Stomach
 Tapeworms
 Bibliography

• Aggravate:  Mr. Varasdi here claims that, because the original meaning of "aggravate" was "to make worse", anyone who uses it to mean "to annoy, to irritate" is incorrect.  This is a fallacy that Varasdi embraces throughout the book:  the idea that the meaning of a word cannot change, and that only the most technical specialist's use of a word can be considered correct.
• Airplane tire wear:  Varasdi here points out that most airplane tire wear happens during taxiing, rather than during takeoff and landing.  Granted that this is surprising, I don't think there's really a common misperception here.  I don't believe that most people have even thought about this one.  This is another common failing throughout the book.
• Aisle:  Varasdi points out that the original meaning of "aisle" was "outer sections of a church", and denies that a bride can "walk down the aisle" of a modern church.  He's refusing to permit language change again.
• Alumni:  Because the Latin "alumni" would mean "former male students", Varasdi denies that in English it can be used to mean "both male and female former students".  This is the "word meanings can't change" fallacy again.
• American Revolutionary War:  Varasdi endorses the idea that von Steuben's training in "methods of European warfare" was critical to the success of the Revolution.  I'm no historian, but this doesn't seem to be accepted theory any more, if it ever was.  I invite comment by historians.
• Antarctica:  "Antarctica is also seldom recognized as the coldest and most icy place in the world."  In fact, I don't know of anyone who does not know that.
• Appleseed, Johny:  Varasdi perpetuates the common misconception that John Chapman was some sort of apple evangelist, rather than a commercial apple grower who kept moving west because civilization followed him, and he hated being around people.
• Aristotle:  Varasdi mocks Aristotle because he was wrong about certain factual matters (anatomy, the cause of earthquakes, gravity).  Despite the fact that no one solved, for instance, the true nature of gravity for thousands of years after Aristotle's death, Varasdi thinks his incorrect ideas about the relative accelerations of light and heavy objects mean that he was not "a brilliant thinker".  This is technically known as "Whiggish history" - the idea that one can condemn people using insights gained only in hindsight.  Varasdi also ignores the real reason Aristotle is still respected:  his invention of formal logical method.
• Armor suits:  Varasdi denies that people wearing armor were clumsy or slow because of it.  He does this by defining "armor" as "light, well-designed armor", and even admits in a later paragraph that some armor really did weigh down the wearer.
• Bacteria:  "The most important role of bacteria is in decomposing dead plant and animal tissues."  Well, no.  Or at least, only if Varasdi gets to define "important", since bacteria also do such things as let mamals and insects continue to exist, break down cellulose in the digestive tracts of ruminants and termites, and fix nitrogen from the atmosphere (which permits all other organisms to have such nitrogen-containing materials as proteins).  Mr. Varasdi appears to have read an old high school biology text as his only research.
• Bald eagle:  "The bald eagle . . . is not bald."  Did anyone in the world really think it was?  Is it really surprising to anyone that it just has white feathers on its head?
• Basketball:   " . . . surprisingly, no one figured out until 1912 that using bottomless nets [as opposed to closed ones, or literal peach baskets] would greatly increase the game's speed."  Why is that surprising?  Again, Mr. Varasdi engages in Whiggish history, mocking people in the past for not seeing what's obvious to him in retrospect.
• Bees collecting honey:  Does anyone really think bees collect honey?  Varasdi spends two paragraphs exploding the idea that bees somehow search out and find honey and just retrieve it for the hive.  However, speaking as a former junior-high science teacher, I've never met anyone who thought that.
• Billion:  This is another example of Varasdi just telling his audience a neat fact he knows, rather than exploding a misconception.  Yes, in the USA a "billion" is a thousand millions, where in Europe it's a million millions, but not knowing that is ignorance, not a misbelief.
• Boiling point:  Varasdi:  "Although most people think that water boils at 212 degrees F, this only occurs at sea level and at mean atmospheric pressure.  At higher elevations or under lower air pressure, water boils at lower temperatures."  Nope.  Elevation (subject to the actual height of Earth's mountains) is irrelevant, only air pressure affects boiling point.  Water boils at a lower temperature at the top of Everest, or a higher temperature at the surface of the Dead Sea, because the air pressure varies and for no other reason.
• Bulls seeing red:  Here Varasdi perpetuates a misconception rather than clearing one up.  "Like many animals, including dogs, bulls see only in various shades of light and dark."  Simply wrong.  All vertebrates, from cartilaginous fishes (sharks and allies) to birds to reptiles to all mammals, can see color to some degree.  Our degree and range of color vision varies, but either a dog or a bull can tell a red cape from a gray one.  The bull probably doesn't care, but it can tell.
• Cabinet:  "Because the framers of the Constitution apparently intended that the Senate advise the President, it has also become the custom for the Senate to confirm cabinet appointments."  This is an amazing error, because Article II, Section II of the Constitution includes, ". . . and he [the President] shall nominate, and by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, shall appoint ambassadors, other public ministers and consuls . . . and all other officers of the United States . . . "  I think that's a little stronger than "apparently . . . became the custom. . . "
• Columbus, Christopher:  In the midst of a largely correct article, the following sentence appears:  "The first Europeans to actually arrive in North America were Norwegian Vikings, probably Leif Eriksson[sic], around A.D. 1000."  Well, no.  "Viking" is a Norwegian word meaning something like "raiding".  Leif wasn't out to raid North America.  It is not correct to refer to the whole Norwegian culture of the day as "Vikings", any more than we refer to all of them as "farmers".
• Crickets:  "It is not true . . . that crickets chirp by rubbing their legs together."  Correct, but surely you could mention that grasshoppers do stridulate by rubbing their legs?
• Daddy longlegs:  "It comes as a surprise to most people to learn that a daddy longlegs is not a spider.  In fact, it is not even an insect."  What on Earth does "not even an insect" mean?  He also says that the daddy longlegs' (harvestman's) eight legs don't imply a relationship with spiders.  In fact, a very large number of arachnids (relatives of spiders) do have eight legs.
• Darwin, Charles:  Varasdi says that Darwin's ". . . significant contribution . . . was the expansion of . . . evolutionary ideas in a scientific work supported by a monumental body of physical evidence."  Actually, Darwin's contribution was his model, natural selection, to explain evolution, which was already supported by enormous bodies of evidence (Buffon, Haeckel and others).  He also brought into biology a concept from the then-embryonic geology:  the idea of processes acting over very long times, very slowly, to produce dramatic changes.  Darwin's own gathering of physical evidence, while important, wasn't comparable to his theoretical work.  In his Origin of Species Darwin did provide the best argument to date to demonstrate the fact of evolution, but it is not correct to imply that his theoretical work was unimportant.
• Dinosaurs:  Varasdi claims that some dinosaurs could fly.  Actually pterosaurs were not dinosaurs, nor particularly closely related to them.
• Donkeys, mules, jackasses and asses:  " . . . the ass is an African and Asian wild horse midway between the zebra and the true wild horse."  Nope.  It isn't "between" anything, it's a completely different species from zebras and "true" horses (Equus caballo).
• Drinking straws:  In the midst (again) of a basically correct discussion, Varasdi says, " . . . a straw will not work in space, since there is no air pressure to work on the liquid's surface."  This is another bad habit of Varasdi's:  saying something that's almost true.  A straw wouldn't work "in space" (presumably meaning Earth orbit) because there's no air pressure, true, but also because liquids would tend to freeze, evaporate, or sublime away.  It would have been better say " . . . in a vacuum . . ." In fact, straws work fine "in space". The Skylab astronauts used them, for instance.
• Ears:  "The two flaps of skin attached to the sides of the head are not ears."  Yes, they are, Mr. Varasdi.  He means that they aren't important in hearing in humans, which is correct, but the word "ear" certainly does refer to those flaps of skin (and cartilage) just as much as it does to the actual hearing apparatus.
• Earth is round:  "The earth is not really round.  It is an oblate spheroid . . . "  Again, this is almost true.  What he seemingly meant was, "The earth is not a sphere."  It certainly is round ("lacking sharp edges").
• Edison, Thomas:  " . . . Edison alone can be credited for . . . development of public lighting, establishing an electrical distribution system . . . and for promoting the general use of electricity."  Sure, unless you know about George Westinghouse, Mr. Varasdi.
•  Electoral College:  Are there really any living Americans who don't know about the Electoral College?   This is another example of Varasdi correcting what I perceive to be a nonexistent misconception.
• Frozen foods:  Varasdi makes the astonishing statement that ice cannot be cooled below 32 degrees Fahrenheit (0 Celsius)!  Apparently he has misremembered the correct assertion that (at standard pressure) liquid water cannot be cooled below 32 Fahrenheit - not because of some mysterious resistance, but because it freezes below that temperature (and thus ceases to be liquid water).   This article supports my belief that neither Varasdi nor his editor is scientifically literate.
• Giraffes:   After correctly stating that giraffes have only seven bones in their necks, the same number as (almost) all other mammals, Varasdi again drifts into the almost true by saying, "In the giraffe's neck, the seven vertebrae are simply farther apart."  I'll charitably assume that he really meant ". . . simply longer."
• Glass:  This is a truly classic case of perpetuating a misbelief while claiming to dismiss one.  Varasdi here states the classic "glass is a liquid" urban legend.  Glass is non-crystalline, and it can be described as a supercooled liquid in that there's no regular supramolecular structure, but it does not flow at room temperature, as Varasdi here claims.  The stories of homes with windowpanes thickened at the bottom are actually explained by the fact that older methods of making plate glass produced uneven thicknesses.  See the Physics FAQ .
• Green apples:  This is weird.  The first paragraph of this entry says that green apples are digestible and don't make one sick.  Then the second one admits that green apples contain more acid and long-chain pectins and  can make some people sick.  What exactly is the point of this?
• Hay fever:  Was it really necessary to deny that hay fever "is a fever".  (Presumably Varasdi means that the body temperature doesn't rise, but again I doubt anyone thought so in the first place.)
• Immaculate Conception:  A true nitpick here, but a sign of very bad proofreading:  in an otherwise correct essay on the Immaculate Conception doctrine of the Roman Catholic Church, Varasdi says, " . . . the Virgin Mary was conceived in her mother's womb, Saint Anne. . . "  I doubt that the Virgin's mother's womb was independently sainted.
• Incest:  "It is usually overlooked that inbreeding also magnifies the influence of dominant genes which often leads to what is referred to as the 'hybrid vigor' of inbred groups."  What a horrible mess that is.  First of all, it's not meaningful to speak of "magnifying the influence of dominant genes".  A dominant gene is by definition either expressed, or not.  Anything with more variation than that can't be dominant.  Second, as one might guess from the name, "hybrid" vigor does not occur in inbred groups.  On the contrary, it happens when two lines are crossed.  Varasdi has stated the exact opposite of the truth here.  Again, it seems that neither he nor his editor knows any science whatsoever.  (See also  Frozen foods .)
• Jellyfish:  "The jellyfish is not a fish . . . "  Could anyone in the world be surprised by that?
• Jesus as a carpenter:  Compare these two sentences from Varasdi:  "No where [sic] in the Bible does it mention that Jesus was ever a carpenter as most people think."  ". . . Mark 6:3 tells that people called him a carpenter . . . "  Apparently we're to assume that the people were wrong in thinking Jesus a carpenter, even though that makes no sense.  Surely if Jesus were actually a stonemason or shepherd, someone would have said so?
• Largest animal:  For one thing, the blue whale is not " . . . found throughout the oceans of the world."  For another, krill are not microscopic as Varasdi seems to be claiming.
• Moths:  This whole entry boils down to "Moths don't eat clothes.  Baby moths eat clothes."  Eh?
• Perspiration:  While correctly stating that sweat is nearly odorless, and the odor of a sweating person is caused by bacteria that break down substances in the perspiration, Varasdi again strikes a false note:  "Antiperspirants and deodorants contain insecticides and bactericides that are similar to those used in the garden."  Insecticides?!
• The Plague:  ". . . the plague is not directly communicable from one person to another as one might think."  Yes it is, if it's in the form of the pneumonic plague.
• Pony:  "A pony is not a baby horse."  Pardon me, but there's only one appropriate response to this miracle of lack-of-surprise:  DUH!
• Prepositions at the end of a sentence:  Further proof that this book was not copyedited, in addition to not being fact-checked, lies in this sentence, "Contrary to what you thought you learned in school, there is, and never has been, a rule that prohibits ending a sentence with a preposition."  (Even without the mistake, it's a pretty lousy sentence, isn't it?)
• Shark attacks:  "A shark will be more likely to attack anything in the water that resembles its primary food-the sea lion."  I believe Varasdi is here referring to the great white shark.  Of course not all sharks have sea lions as their primary food.  For instance, the blue shark eats mainly small squids.
• Shriveled skin:  In discussing the phenomenon of "bathtub fingers", Varasdi says, "Because the internal body fluids of humans are more concentrated than fresh water, water is absorbed by skin immersed in water through the process of osmosis."  (Side comment:  is that a bad sentence or what?)  Well, actually the "internal body fluids" of humans are irrelevant, because the part of the skin that swells in the bathtub is not alive.  It's the epidermis, which is composed of dead cells.  They do swell by taking up water, but again Varasdi is only almost right.
• Skull:  "The human skull . . . nor does it consist of just the top of the head as most people imagine."  Does anyone actually think the skull covers just the top of the head?  Again, Varasdi pointlessly disputes nonexistent myth.
• Snakes:  "They bite only to inject venom into their victim in order to kill it for a meal."  This is amazingly wrong.  First of all, not all snakes are venomous.  Second, even venomous snakes also bite in self-defense, and to actually swallow food.   Varasdi actually mentions that most snakes are not venomous in the next paragraph, which makes the above even more startlingly careless.
• Speed of sound:  Did I mention how carelessly this book had been edited?  The description of the speed of sound here is not bad, but it's unnecessary (again, there is no misconception here to refute).  It's also redundant, because essentially the same description is given under "Mach number".
• Spiders:  True, spiders are not insects, but Varasdi here makes another biology howler:  "Insects have biting jaws and mouth parts used to tearing and chewing their victims."  Well, some insects, but Varasdi himself wrote in the section on mosquitos that they can't bite, and have no tearing mouth parts.  Did he not know that mosquitos are insects?  (They're flies, in fact.)
• Star of David:  Compare these two extracts from the same entry:  "The Star of David is an ancient symbol . . . " and "The earliest recorded appearance of the design can be traced to its secular use in the thirteenth century."  First of all, why "can be traced to" instead of "was"?  Second, perhaps someone should tell Mr. Varasdi the definition of "ancient".
• Statue of Liberty:  "Although it is believed that the Statue of Liberty was a gift from the French people, only the statue itself was built and paid for by France."  I don't think I need to comment here.
• Stomach:  I don't want to repeat the mess Varasdi makes of this, so let me just say that he is clearly paraphrasing a brief description from another source, which he doesn't understand.  For instance, he doesn't know the difference between "digestion" and "absorption".
• Tapeworms:  Another case of being almost right.  "Tapeworms are normally acquired from eating uncooked, infected beef, fish or pork."  Not quite right on several counts.  For one, he means "by eating", not "from eating".  For another he means "undercooked", not "uncooked" (although uncooked is, as usual, not completely wrong).
• Bibliography:  In the Bibliography, Varasdi comments that one group of books "does not deal with fallacies as such".  Included in this list is The Straight Dope, by Cecil Adams, which is a veritable compendium of exploded fallacies.  I suspect Varasdi meant that fallacies were not the sole subject of these books.