U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-20-2011, 08:14 AM
 
6,793 posts, read 4,074,408 times
Reputation: 672

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I'm curious to see the link to the site you pasted that from....Oh, never mind, I checked it out at snopes.... snopes.com: The Fall of the Athenian Republic Mostly false...It would behoove you to do a bit of fact checking before posting such rubbish.
One thing I've found that is very easy to "fact check", is that snopes.com is nothing but a ultra-left leaning, super biased husband/wife team that have no formal training in investigative research.
Try checking out THAT fact.

I'm surprised you'd "put stock" in something so pitifully weak.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-20-2011, 08:23 AM
 
16,105 posts, read 17,912,079 times
Reputation: 15897
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
One thing I've found that is very easy to "fact check", is that snopes.com is nothing but a ultra-left leaning, super biased husband/wife team that have no formal training in investigative research.
Try checking out THAT fact.

I'm surprised you'd "put stock" in something so pitifully weak.
And the fact that the original was about Bush and Gore doesn't give you some idea that the email is phony? The names change, but the *facts* stay the same? The person quoted changes too? When you have been around long enough, you end up getting copies of these emails with different names yourself.

Here's a post from 2008 debunking it from a different website:
The fall of the Athenian Republic Debunked from Planck's Constant

As for the snopes site itself
http://www.factcheck.org/2009/04/snopescom/

Last edited by nana053; 08-20-2011 at 08:31 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 12:39 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,884 posts, read 31,780,534 times
Reputation: 12629
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
One thing I've found that is very easy to "fact check", is that snopes.com is nothing but a ultra-left leaning, super biased husband/wife team that have no formal training in investigative research.
Try checking out THAT fact.

I'm surprised you'd "put stock" in something so pitifully weak.
I'm not surprised that you believe the false letters circulated about snopes. You seem to be the one too lazy to check your "facts". Snopes Exposed - Is Snopes.com Biased? - Urban Legends
You should wipe off the crow feathers stuck to your lower lip. They are beginning to accumulate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 03:41 PM
 
6,793 posts, read 4,074,408 times
Reputation: 672
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
I'm not surprised that you believe the false letters circulated about snopes. You seem to be the one too lazy to check your "facts". Snopes Exposed - Is Snopes.com Biased? - Urban Legends
You should wipe off the crow feathers stuck to your lower lip. They are beginning to accumulate.
I'm not lazy...I work more hours at my businesses and my volunteer efforts than anybody you ever met. I'm at work right now.

Look sans...the fact of the matter is, you don't have any more proof of the veracity of snopes, than the veracity of what they say is or isn't accurate.

Com'on...just a dude and his chick with no formal training to do what they are doing? That smells right there!
If ANY Theist based source like them, was making claims like they do...you'd point to their pitiful "credentials" and laugh at them.
Plus, there is the added bonus of me saying "snopes sux", gets you all bolloxed up!

From the little I checked...their bias is epic...and THEY'VE been "debunked" themselves many times.
So, why have "faith" in those people, and what they have to say?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 04:50 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,744,896 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
What does that have to do with this topic?
religionists reproduce like rats, their vote counts just keep growing and growing. And being religionist, they refuse to be educated against the teachings of their closer masters, the clergy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 08:04 PM
 
39,189 posts, read 10,872,385 times
Reputation: 5093
While Gldnrule makes a good point at least about asking whether any partcular website should be accepted at face value (Snopes in this response says that anyone can make errors and it is always worthwhile checking) it seems that their credentials are pretty good.

" CLAIM: TruthorFiction.com is a more reliable source than Snopes. First off, TruthorFiction.com has condemned this anonymous attack against Snopes.com and, in fact, lauds the site as an "excellent" and "authoritative" resource."

http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/int...es_exposed.htm
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 08:09 PM
 
Location: City-Data Forum
7,945 posts, read 4,744,896 times
Reputation: 1328
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
One thing I've found that is very easy to "fact check", is that snopes.com is nothing but a ultra-left leaning, super biased husband/wife team that have no formal training in investigative research.
Try checking out THAT fact.

I'm surprised you'd "put stock" in something so pitifully weak.
So, can you point me to the consevative fact checkers? and the government stats on how Obama won the presidency.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-20-2011, 09:23 PM
 
Location: Victoria, BC.
30,884 posts, read 31,780,534 times
Reputation: 12629
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule View Post
You are correct, I don't.
They don't vote for "the best person for the job overall"...they vote for whoever will "enhance" their personal agenda, whatever that agenda may be.

Check this out sans...what would you say is "the average IQ" of "citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare?:
Professor Joseph Olson of Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul, Minnesota, points out some interesting facts concerning last November's Presidential election:
Number of States won by: Obama: 19 McCain: 29
Square miles of land won by: Obama: 580,000 McCain: 2,427,000
Population of counties won by: Obama: 127 million McCain: 143 million
Murder rate per 100,000 residents in counties won by: Obama: 13.2 McCain: 2.1
Professor Olson adds: "In aggregate, the map of the territory McCain won was mostly the land owned by the taxpaying citizens of the country. Obama territory mostly encompassed those citizens living in low income tenements and living off various forms of government welfare..."
So then are you still claiming that this is accurate, or are you going to admit that you really did not check it for accuracy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2011, 03:19 AM
 
39,189 posts, read 10,872,385 times
Reputation: 5093
Quote:
Originally Posted by sanspeur View Post
So then are you still claiming that this is accurate, or are you going to admit that you really did not check it for accuracy?
You are probably way ahead of me but...

"This chain e-mail is a hoax. The "statistics" are grossly incorrect, and Prof. Olson says he didn't write it.
First, Joseph Olson is a professor at Hamline (not Hemline) University School of Law in St. Paul, Minn. None of what appears in this e-mail was written by him. He has been denying authorship of this old hoax since earlier versions first cropped up after the 2000 election. Most recently he posted a disclaimer about the 2008 version on his university profile page."
FactCheck.org: What's the deal with Prof. Joseph Olson's "unreported stats" from the 2008 election? (http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/whats_the_deal_with_prof_joseph_olsons.html - broken link)

I suppose Goldenrule, being essentially a reasonable and honest person has admitted his error.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2011, 05:58 AM
 
Location: Hamburg, NY
1,350 posts, read 3,049,825 times
Reputation: 1025
Palin, Perry & Bachmann are so extreme that they make the Mormon (Romney) look like the most mainstream candidate.

Perry will obviously do well in Texas & the states that still believe in the "South is gonna rise again" mantra (not only due to his extreme religious views but also because of his secessionist talk). One good thing about having 3 far right nut jobs running for the same nomination is that they will basically split the the tin foil hat crowd & fundie vote. The longer the 3 stay in the race the better chance that none of them get the nomination ............ but if 2 of them ever get smart enough to consolidate the ticket look out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top