Has anyone ever found SNOPES to be wrong?

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

Just had an email from someone who had forwarded the Missionaries in Kenya know the true Barack Hussien Mohammed Obama.

I'd already responded 'all' about forwarding lies without checking and sent the snopes link.

In this email, she actual said 'I know some of you will send me to snopes, but they're not always correct. I've found problems with them before.' and that you have to 'research this' yourself..... good christians cant vote for a pro-abortion... etc etc.
(yeah, she's from the Bible Belt)

So altho Snopes LISTS their sources at the bottom whereas others don't, just WONDERING if ANYbody has found snopes to be incorrect in the true/false/multiple assessments?

[librechik]

1. problems? Does Snopes find no evidence for Noah's Ark?

Make your correspondent give you examples of where they have been wrong/ Let her prover her own extraordinary assertion. And for the record, no, never found any troubles with Snopes. But then I never felt I had to prove Biblical reality.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

13. It's like discussing abortion and life...

sperm / egg / fertilization / zygote / attachment to uterine wall / cell division / nerve-brain cell development / cognizance.

It's just not easy for the black & white feely crowd.

[Az]

2. Snopes did have to retract comments about Michael Moore one time

If I remember correctly there was some snafu where they green lit a rumor about Moore and then later had to retract it. They did fess up to the mistake. But they are usually pretty spot on despite their slight lean to the right.

[MisterP]

18. their Gitmo affirmations were heavily r.w. some years ago:

basically, "they're real threats and scary misogynists 'coz some guy with shiny medals told us so"

[Lex]

3. The "problem" she has with snopes is that it debunks her crap.

nt

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

Ya Think? LOL!

[flvegan]

4. So this e-mail points out the very flaws in the point it makes.

Nice try, though. Calling a debunking into question before it's found.

"Good Christians" can't vote for a pro-choice candidate, no matter how many wars he wants to start.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

8. My reply to her in requesting she drop my name

I'd already stated I was an 'anti-Republicanist'.

I told her my opinions on abortion (never had one, dont know anyone who has, detest it ((.. but dont argue it either))), and added WHat I REALLY Detest is a Political Party using Religious people as fools... I FEEL LIKE I'M LIVING IN IRAN!

Sigh.

[LunaSea]

5. what was the "good christian" position on "bearing false witness" again?

I forget.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

9. She ignored my first reply all to her

about Bearing False Witness...

she just followed up about BHO being a 'muslim'. So I knew where she stood LONG before THIS last emnail.

[arcadian]

6. Snopes is a very rightwing website.

I don't use them

[Ashy Larry]

12. Really? Why do you say that?

They debunk all the right-wing emails I've seen.

[arcadian]

43. A lot of DUers know about snopes and it's rightwing slant.

Here is just one instance:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/website.asp

How exactly is that "article" an urban legend or a rumor?

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

56. Any Intelligent DU'er Knows That's A Bunch Of Malarkey. And How Does Your Link Possibly Bolster

your position? The incident in your link was perfectly legitimate and accurate. Epic fail.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

16. ROFLMAO!!!! No They're Not. They're A Great Site To Debunk Crap With.

You're always so funny with these silly statements!

:silly:

[OswegoAtheist]

17. I've been with snopes for seven years

I've researched for them, and I've spoken to the webmasters numerous times, and I wholeheartedly rebuke your statement. Of course, anyone familiar with snopes knows that a statement like "snopes is a very (whatever)wing website" knows that means, "snopes debunked something I desperately want to believe is real; ergo, they are politically opposed to me." That is something I'd expect from freepers and fux newz talking heads.

Oswego "and you, sir, are no snopes" Atheist

[Wilber_Stool]

34. They were a driving fource

behind the alt.folklore.urban newsgroup if I'm not mistaken.

[arcadian]

41. Driving force? It's all about content.

You can't have a popular website with stale content. That's why snopes just makes shit up and passes them off as urban legends.

[apocalypsehow]

36. "That is something I'd expect from freepers and fux newz talking heads."

Yep - there is a tiny coterie of DU'ers here who fit that bill to a "T": debunk some cherished nostrum of theirs, and they'll spend an entire thread pouting about it. Happened just the other day.

The poster you're replying to above is a case in point.

[arcadian]

40. Care to back up your statements?

"The poster you're replying to above is a case in point."

Please explain.

[arcadian]

39. So, all of your 29 posts expect that behavior from freepers?

:rofl:

That is too fucking much. Their site has a bunch of jingoistic pro-Iraq war crap. They are the ones actually creating rumors and urban legends, bull shit puff peices like,

"Did a U.S. soldier in Iraq actually spend his entire month paycheck buying candy for Iraqi children?"

"TRUE!"

"Sgt. Schmo from F Troop actually spent his entire on moths salary on buying candy for Iraqi children"

I made up the scenario but, I could find hundreds of articles on snopes just like it. Care to tell me how crap like that is a urban legend? The site is pure crap. Others on DU have noted their right wing slant.

[Nye Bevan]

54. They *also* have stuff like this:-

debunking claim that Obama is a Muslim: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

debunking lies about Obama's tax plan: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/taxes.asp

confirming that Laura Bush killed someone in a car accident: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/laura.asp

confirming that George Bush punched someone at Yale: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/rugby.asp

Snopes is *not* a "right-wing" site or a "left-wing" site, it is an *accurate* site. The fact that not everything on Snopes favors our side does not make it "pure crap".

[arcadian]

59. The site is certainly pro-Iraq war.

Which I equate to being pro right wing.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

55. All Of His 29 Are Probably Rooted In More Intellect Than All Of Yours.

What does his post count have to do with his point? Oh yeah, NOTHING.

[arcadian]

46. What is your real name? I would like to email snopes to confirm what you have said.

You shouldn't have a problem with this considering that you yourself are a factchecker. PM me with the information. In fact, they have never debunked anything that I have held to be the truth, I merely consider them to be a rightwing propaganda machine.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

57. "rightwing propaganda machine"... ROFLMAO!!!!! That Is Too Funny!!!!!

:crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[kestrel91316]

7. "Barack Hussien Mohammed Obama"?? But I thought his real name was

Barack Hussein Mohammed Al-Quaeda Terrist Obama.........

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

10. Jesus H Christ

The H stood for Hussein but they ignore that! <wink>

[Liberal In Texas]

30. You know, I'm going to start using that!

They won't know if it's true or not.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

31. You can always create a bogus email about some Scholar in Israel...

.. who discovered it in Essine Text.. and forward it along!

Don't forget to say you googled it and it's ALL TRUE!

<smile>

[Liberal In Texas]

33. Essenes. (It's a NYT crossword regular.)

I don't send out emails like this, but I'll certainly mention it to the next fundy/freeper that brings it up.

Yeah, just google it!

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

53. LOL! No no, Essines from the Black Sea Scrolls discoverd in 1937.

NOT the other group! hahahaah

[ColbertWatcher]

14. Pfft. Check out his name at the link ...

http://www.wikiality.com/Barack_Hussein_Obama

BTW, I take full responsibility for all the rumors that the freepers are spreading about Obama (they obviously stole them all from Wikiality!).

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

24. that is too funny!

[ColbertWatcher]

25. Thank you.! We try to keep track of all the rumors.

But, it seems the freepers don't get the joke!

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

27. Ever seen this one?

This is amazing information...I had never thought about this before!


""I doubt Obama would qualify for any type of security clearance with his background so full of extremist contacts. Isn't it scary that he will have such power and top-secret information if he is elected President? We don't know nearly enough about him to have an informed opinion, and whatwe DO know scares me to death! How about you?


And, think about this:

IF Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama were to apply for a job with the FBI or with the SecretService, he'd be disqualified because of his past association with William Ayers, a known terrorist.

IF he is elected President, he would not qualify to even be his own body guard!""

[ColbertWatcher]

28. You should add those to the page!

Before you post though, register so your IP address is hidden.

[Ashy Larry]

11. Nope. The person who wrote that is lying.

I've seen it on some other right-wing emails. I saw one that even said something like, "Yes, I have checked this on snopes.com and its true."

Of course if you actually checked snopes, it was false.

I have found that a lot of pro-lifers have no problem lying because they see it as a means to an end. They think abortion is murder and "thou shall not kill" is more important than "thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor."

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

21. I asked her if it would be okay if the Catholics banned Birth Control

... or is she just 'semi pro-life'? <smile>

[melody]

15. Morons can believe anything they like without evidence n/t

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

19. and this LAST email from her PROVES it...

This is amazing information...I had never thought about this before!


"""I doubt Obama would qualify for any type of security clearance with his background so full of extremist contacts. Isn't it scary that he will have such power and top-secret information if he is elected President? We don't know nearly enough about him to have an informed opinion, and whatwe DO know scares me to death! How about you?


And, think about this:

IF Barak Hussein Muhammed Obama were to apply for a job with the FBI or with the SecretService, he'd be disqualified because of his past association with William Ayers, a known terrorist.

IF he is elected President, he would not qualify to even be his own body guard!""

[melody]

35. Yeah, I get that crap from my uncle -- McCain has the terrorist connections not Obama

He bumps elbows with women who praise other women who try to murder abortion doctors. That IS a domestic terrorist. William Ayers did what he did a long time ago and is now a thoroughly rehabilitated professor. McCain still has wacko terrorist friends.

[rucky]

20. That's a lie on top of a lie.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

22. and this isnt (-1) times (-1) to equal (+1) n/t

[timtom]

23. Good Christians can't vote for a pro-abortion...

But they seem to have a merry f***ing time with mass murder and genocide.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

26. After kids are BORN, they're fair game for 'collateral damage'. n/t

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

29. Here's a really good comment from Factcheck.org about chain e-mails.

http://www.factcheck.org/specialreports/that_chain_e-mail_your_friend_sent_to.html

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

32. I sent it to my 'friend' saying 'still trying to save the souls...

.. who bear false witness against their neighbor'.

<smile>

[OneGrassRoot]

37. How, funny...factcheck.org is an Annenberg Foundation project...

I have them on my mind with the whole Ayres thing the right is trying to push.

:)

Just rambling tonight...ignore me...moving right along...lol

[On the Road]

38. Snopes Carried an Explanation of the Aircraft Damage to the Pentagon

that I do not think they can substantiate.

"As the front of the Boeing 757 hit the Pentagon, the outer portions of the wing likely snapped during the initial impact, then were pushed inwards toward the fuselage and carried into the building's interior."

http://www.snopes.com/rumors/pentagon.asp

Not only are the physics questionable, but the best explanation of the crash showed visual evidence that the wings actually stayed outside the building.

It may seem small, and they do say "likely," but it made me question the standard they use for including facts on the sire. IIRC, the original version of the page actually contained a diagram.

[True_Blue_KY_Dem]

45. Actually, I still have my doubts about 9/11......................

as some of the pictures showed, where were the wings?! I find it hard to believe a inexperienced pilot could fly a 747 or 757 less than 30 feet off the ground without crashing it first before it hit the Pentagon!

However, I get a lot of my info from Infowars.com. I still say it was a "inside job". The magnitude of the damage would have been far greater. I personally believe it was by a Harpoon or Tomahawk missle(former US Navy, Fire-Control Tech.).

[On the Road]

47. Here's a Link to an Article from Popular Mechanics

Why wasn't the hole as wide as a 757's 124-ft.-10-in. wingspan? A crashing jet doesn't punch a cartoon-like outline of itself into a reinforced concrete building, says ASCE team member Mete Sozen, a professor of structural engineering at Purdue University. In this case, one wing hit the ground; the other was sheared off by the force of the impact with the Pentagon's load-bearing columns, explains Sozen, who specializes in the behavior of concrete buildings. What was left of the plane flowed into the structure in a state closer to a liquid than a solid mass. "If you expected the entire wing to cut into the building," Sozen tells PM, "it didn't happen."

http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/military_law/1227842.html?page=6

There was another one that showed the evidence more visually, but it's been several years since I saw it.

On Edit: Here's a page of links to similar articles.

http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/refute.htm

[True_Blue_KY_Dem]

42. Uh..............NO!

Not that I know of. They have been pretty well accurate. Same goes for FactCheck.

[Dem2theMax]

44. Quick. Right now. Send her an email and tell her to watch Olbermann tonight.

He brings up all of McCain's 'terrorist' connections. She'll explode watching it.

Just trying to do my part. :evilgrin:

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

50. Aw, I was too late..... too bad..

But I did send her the factcheck.org link in '.. hopes that it would save her soul from bearing false witness'. <wink>

[DemoTex]

48. Flem Snopes?

Often wrong. Faulkner was always right.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

52. That ol 'Flem flam' ! LOL! n/t.

[paulthompson]

49. YES! Snopes can be wrong sometimes

Around 2002, I noticed that Snopes had the claim that rich Saudis took secret flights shortly after 9/11 listed as an urban legend. I wrote to them and pointed in particular to an article in the Tampa Tribune from October 2001 called "Phantom Flight from Florida" that discussed one of these flights in detail, using a link to the newspapers own newspaper archives via www.archive.org. In response, Snopes would not alter their webpage on this article or even edit it to acknowledge the existence of the article I mentioned. I had a number of back and forth emails over this with the Snopes people and I came to the conclusion that they were blatantly disregarding evidence they didn't like. They had a number of other similar biases relating to 9/11 that all leaned in favor of supporting the Bush administration's position, and I couldn't convince them to change anything.

Disgusted at their lack of ethics, I've never bothered to try to correct them again. Of course, what they called an "urban legend" about the Saudi flights later became accepted fact after more stories came out about it.

[JustFiveMoreMinutes]

51. I never expect perfection, but I don't buy into 1 or 2 mistakes

... makes something someone says 'questionable'.

If someone is right 98% of the time, I'll trust their assessment.
But I never ARGUE to death any rebuttal if alternate RELIABLE sources are offered.

But she just said '... snopes is sometimes wrong ...' and that was the end of the debate on that.
She also stopped sending the email so I could 'respond all'.. hence she was just sending out 'truths' without anybody able to debunk it. She said 'simply delete, else forward'.

When one isn't open to discussion.. closed minds only echo the thoughts of others.

[Deep13]

58. I disagreed with their conclusion on a historical item once.

They concluded that Ring Around the Rosie is not a plague song. I found the reasons unconvincing, expecially when compared to the numerous historians how regard it as such.