DiscussMormonism.com

Anyone care to Snopes this?

If you’re not concerned with either the veracity of the junk you believe and publish here, or the background of the folks providing them to you, why are you concerned with the background of anyone associated with Snopes?

Shouldn’t you be addressing their facts, instead?

Did you have a particular statement of theirs that you’d like to intelligently contest?

And? Does this affect the veracity of the information presented on the website?

- Doc

So his private life is just like a Republican's secret life, minus the closeted gay sex. Does that make Snopes fact checking wrong?

DarkHelmet wrote:So his private life is just like a Republican's secret life, minus the closeted gay sex. Does that make Snopes fact checking wrong?

Well, minus the closeted gay sex and the dishonest hypocritical moralizing. Don’t forget that second part. ; )

I mean, it's a fact-checking website, no an elected office. Additionally, it's the GOP that made moralizing part of its national platform, so it should be rightly scrutinized. I don't really care if this guy is wired up on coke and doing blow off a hooker's ample ass, as long as his information is correct. Speaking of doing blow and crackin' ripper magoos, has anyone had a Papa John's pizza recently? I haven't, but let me tell you something, I'd still order a pie if the deal is good enough no matter how much methamphetamine the CEO smokes before a Louisville Cardinals football game.

- Doc

DarkHelmet wrote:So his private life is just like a Republican's secret life, minus the closeted gay sex. Does that make Snopes fact checking wrong?

Does it make the Republican party platform wrong?

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:I mean, it's a fact-checking website, no an elected office.

True, so what are the credentials for Snopes that has you giving that website credence ? (if you do consider Snopes a valid source of checked facts)

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: Additionally, it's the GOP that made moralizing part of its national platform, so it should be rightly scrutinized.

Why is that? and where in the platform is this "moralizing" you speak of?...is it related to a woman's right to choose? or is there some non-moral science behind that?

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote: I don't really care if this guy is wired up on coke and doing blow off a hooker's ample ass, as long as his information is correct.

I agree...and I feel the same way about Legislation v Legislators....but by what means have you come to trust this guy?

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:Speaking of doing blow and crackin' ripper magoos, has anyone had a Papa John's pizza recently? I haven't, but let me tell you something, I'd still order a pie if the deal is good enough no matter how much methamphetamine the CEO smokes before a Louisville Cardinals football game.

- Doc

Only if I had a coupon.

Doctor CamNC4Me wrote:And? Does this affect the veracity of the information presented on the website?

- Doc

and where doth this veracity come from again?

Subs is just a damned idiot, typical republican who lashes out at sites that tend to prove they're a lying bunch of arseholes.

He asks why people give Snopes "credence" as if they're just making bald assertions on things and we're dumb enough to blindly accept what they say.

If he had actually spent any amount of time reading SNopes articles he'd know that it isn't a political site and it debunks many left wing fake social media memes as well. It also sources all of its claims making it easy for anyone to check what they already checked.

Like the recent piece on Cooper Anderson supposedly "kneeling in a ditch" or whatever. They didn't just say, "FALSE, take it from us because we're trustworthy!"

They provided the actual video footage of the event well before Cooper posted his rebuttal.

Of the hundreds and hundreds of snopes articles I've seen, I have never once seen an example of someone proving them wrong. All I see are whiny little critters like Subs slinking in to call them biased and then slinking away when it is show that they're just upset because their side tends to be the one lying so often.