Snopes
 

What I really cannot work out is why people takes snopes as gospel. Just because they say it is bull, why does it define it as bull? Every now and then I see things on snopes that have no reliable evidence that they are legends, and some that I know have happened for a fact. Why should people beleive them over anybody else? Garrr, it just angers me so.

BECAUSE SNOPES RULES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!









(paid for by the people that believe snopes rules)

Re: Snopes
 

Well, I checked you out on Snopes and they say you don't exist. Since they have a website and I don't know that you do, it must be true.

:D

Um, because they list their primary sources in an article, thereby allowing me to go and do my own research into the accuracy of what they've said.

The usual burden of proof is to demonstrate that something has happened, not that something hasn't happened.

Can I have a source to check up on that?

Macheath, I will dig up a story I can prove is true. Also, I love the way they take jokes, and prove that the jokes couldn't happen in real life.

I agree with Macheath. Snopes does their research and documents it. It's the first place I turn for hoaxbusting.

I also like that they have an "undetermined" category. They document when something has happened, they search for things that have supposedly happened but for which there is no evidence, and they let you make up your own mind about it. They're usually pretty fair about things - they say "this could have happened but since it almost certainly would have been picked up by news sources and nobody has a record of it, we think it's probably bunk." Or they say "there's no way to tell if this is true or not - it could have happened, and though we couldn't find any evidence for it, that doesn't mean it didn't happen." I trust them.

Hail TheBrit!

Have you heard of Occam's Razor?

The modern interpretation of this 14th century theory of methodological reductionism can be stated as:

"Of two competing theories or explanations, all other things being equal, the simpler one is to be preferred."

Snopes like most competent sources for debunking pseudoscientific or otherwise improbable claims use this methodology to provide more plausible explanations to outrageous claims.

Sadly, logic will often suck the magic out of life.
-GH

I think it's great that someone does look into some of the rumors that float around - It is amazing how fast a rumor can spread and how much it changes from the first telling to the last. A lot of times any resemblance between the beginning and the end result is purely accidental.

http://www.snopes.com/religion/jedi.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2757067.stm

Er...no. They say the same thing.

BBC site says:

And although the sci-fi sect was not officially listed as a religion, collators did include a special code to register the Jedis.



Snopes quotes a spokesperson:

"Because a certain number of people were likely to have put Jedi Knight as a response to that question, it has been included as a code simply to help speed the forms through the machine-readers," a spokesman for the Office of National Statistics told Reuters.

"All that will happen is that it will be recorded as 'Other'," he said. "It certainly does not mean it is recognized as a religion."



So they don't disagree at all.

Garr, forgot to post that a fair bit of that snopes article is factually incorrect. Certain countries which have adopted the UK's system now do recognise jedi as a religion due to the number of responses. It does not work in the UK or Australia, but it does in other places. Will see if I can dig up the sources.

gotta love the snopes

Primarily they are pretty much dead on. Also they do label a lot of things as "Could have happend but too vauge" like categories. Referring to the Jokes that they prove couldn't have happened. Basically a lot of "rumors" are simply to ambiguous to prove out right.

As far as taking it as gospel, the ones I've investiagted always come out true...or whatever Snopes says.

Jamie Lee Curtis may or may not have been born a hermaphrodite.

Just like me.

And all of you!

Snopes themselves, in their "lost legends" section, warn you not to believe EVERYTHING you read on their site. However, if it has a good, verifiable reference, which almost all of their information has, then I take it at it's face value.

Do you have an example of something that you know has happened for a fact? Submit your proof to Snopes and they'll update their listing. The idea is for it to be a ready reference. If you have more accurate information, let them know. "A friend said this happened to him, and he's been my best friend since we were 2" or even first-hand accounts are not going to do it, though. They're going to want photographs, links to credible news agencies and such.

Meanwhile, allow me to continue to use snopes as my first source to verify the continuous stream of crap that floods my inbox daily.

-Mikey

My God! Have I really been on this forum for a year now?

I lost all faith in them after reading their "debunking" of the Little Mermaid video cover/poster art. I suspect that "corporate donations" or unfriendly lawyers could have a part in determining the status of some of the stories.

:rolleyes: Yeah, it's tough when a story you believe turns out to be false.

Seriously, it sounds like they accurately debunked it (here for those who haven't read it already). And it isn't like there aren't other unflattering Disney items verified as true on the Snopes page.

They seem pretty accurate on non-political things.

And Phil Collins may or may not have written "In The Air Tonight" because of some tragic event he witnessed.

Rachel

Snopes has addressed the issue of "why should you trust us?" in the past. I can't find an article right now, but I know they are at least 3 stories (or were) on the site that are false but are deliberately catagorized as true. There is a small disclaimer on the article that basically encourages you to think for yourself and always questions your sources.

....off to find the proof.

Here's a lightning bolt of an idea!! If you don't believe it, then don't read it. They usually reference their sources, not really sure why there's any confusion at all.

It's not because it turned out to be false, it's because I don't see how anyone can honestly believe that the drawing was an accident. I know it wasn't a disgruntled artist out for revenge, but that is obviously a penis, not a sloppily drawn tower.

there's a post in snopes about them being taken as gospel... i forgot which one it was and I've never been able to find it again, I recall it being about the prose Four and Twenty Blackbirds or something like that about recruiting pirates.

It went on to describe the accuracy of the prose then debunked itself stating that it had not facts just supposition and to take things with a grain of salt anyways.

anyone else ever see that?

edit: found it!

http://www.snopes.com/lost/false.htm

LOL - I like the one about the play called "Closed for Remodeling".

Well, I was in an all-male singing group in college, and we were doing a Jack and the Beanstalk segment. This obviously requires a beanstalk. So, there was a rock on stage, with a fabric beanstalk piled up behind it, and an invisible string tied to the beanstalk running up into the rafters. At the appropriate time in the show, pull on the string, and the beanstalk rises.

We did some out-of-town performances, then some on-campus shows. The college newspaper review (written by a female) mentioned the "obviously phallic beanstalk". We all looked at each other in shock; yes, it clearly looked like an erection growing on stage, and somehow 40 horny guys managed not to notice it for a whole month.

So yes, I consider it an accident.

Surely there's a difference between your example and something drawn by a professional employed illustrator for Disney?

Sure, there's always a difference. I'm just saying that the person involved in the creation of something can be blind to alternate viewpoints. If one of us had noticed we were building a huge dick on the stage, trust me, we would have joked about it.

Jedi actually is a religion. I am not sure as to whom recognizes it, and contrary to popular belief, I don't think it is based on the Star Wars Movies....

Here's the link

www.jediism.org

well, shit. I haven't been following snopes and now I've got to call my credit card company:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/scams/citibank3.asp

Snopes definitely is a great source of information. At work, I just love it when stupid people send out emails to all their coworkers and I respond with a link to Snopes saying it's a hoax. Examples include the missing child emails, "Spunkball", numerous post Sept. 11 paranoia, the list goes on and on.