Sorry, just noticed that article was written by a woman. Substitute “she” for “he” in appropriate places in my previous post.
Ok, I’m done scouring the net for now. I will talk to my friend tomorrow and see if I can singlehandedly provide the SD.
Meanwhile, this thread needs a good laugh. I found this whimsically doctored pic on another BB while seeking the truth:
http://www.overgrow.com/edge/gallery/670859/DEA_billboard.jpg
The thread going on over there is pretty active, with a few different people recently stating (like me) that they’re going to go take photos of these illusive billboards. Doper dopers will actually find it pretty comfortable there:
http://www.overgrow.com/edge/showthread.php?threadid=189107&perpage=15&pagenumber=1
What would constitute proof that no such sign exists anywhere in the country? You’d think after all these years somebody could have come up with a picture of at least one sign to make their case. Maybe Snopes should have said “unproved” rather than untrue. Of course, now all somebody has to do is plant a home-made sign by the side of the road for the legend to come true.
These signs are kinda like alien spacecraft…many swear to have seen them, but noone seems to have a good picture. hmmmmm…
As for Snopes being wrong, there is the whole gameshow “doe knob” incident, which Snopes still maintains never happened, even though an mpeg of the incident eventually surfaced and went around the internet.
That said, her reasoning in this case sounds good to me. It was a very dry summer, and domestic crops didn’t do too well. (Check the prices in the produce aisle if you don’t believe me.) The local dope crop probably didn’t fair any better than its legal counterparts.
:::: voices of 1,000 old-timers on this board: Noooooooooo!
quote:
Originally posted by neutron star
Snopes is wrong. It sure isn’t the first time either. I wonder why that site garners such respect on this board. Common sense and logical approaches to problems are all nice and good, but all too often Snopes declares something untrue with absolutely no cites or proof of any kind.
I’d like to declare that its UNTRUE that in 1971 a man named John found $100 on the sidewalk in Manhattan.
Someone please provide a cite for this.
As any scientific-minded person should know, the burden of proof rests upon someone who wants to claim something is TRUE.
Someone please provide a cite showing the existence of ghosts and goblins to me untrue.
Sorry, flawed reasoning neutron star
And, from another poster :
No, flawed reasoning yourself. My reasoning is comparable to saying that a man named John Smith, whose phone number is currently (212)555-5500, and whose address is 555 12th St., found $100 on the street last week. Now, what do you do? Write an article explaining how unlikely it is to find $100 on the street and dismiss it or call up John and ASK HIM?
When proving something untrue, it helps to actually look for evidence of the truth, you know? I’m not saying the lady should have gone on an exhaustive worldwide seach for these signs, but she could have at least given the narcs a ring rather than trying to do every single piece of research relevant to her story on the web.
That said, I drove by the place where I saw the billboard today. Gone. Damn. Well, I think I’ll take my own advice. On Monday, I’m going to call the New Orleans field office of the DEA and ask them
Well, color me shocked and surprised.
It is all a goverment conspiracy. The are keeping tabs on you and knew you were going to drive by again and take a photo. The sent out an emergency team to disassemble the evidence and change the billboard to something safe and placating. The truth is out there. (X-files theme music)
I think I fall into the disbelief category. There should be at least one photo out there if it existed. If it is spray painted on an old billboard it is unlikely that the DEA resorts to vandalism to advertise, so I would be skeptical.
Just today I rode from Duluth to Albert Lea, taking 35W through the Cities. Didn’t see any billboard like this, nor did the driver. I may have missed it, but having heard this urban legend before I kept half an eye out, just out of curiosity.
I’ll keep my eyes peeled on the way back north.
There was a thread somewhere on the SDMB recently about a man being caught masturbating with a pumpking. Snopes proclaimed it as urban legend, while another SDMB poster posted links to the newspaper in the town in which it occurred.
So post pictures of the billboard or a link. The pumpkin thing was proven as a fact by evidence.(if it was so, and the newspaper didn’t write the article based off of no evidence. Woe the day the media does that…) Something this quandry seems to be lacking. Implying that because snopes was wrong once, they must be wrong all the time is stretching it.
Also, in the pumpkin case, it was an urban legend. After Snopes had proclaimed it so, a simliar event actually happened, which Snopes then noted. But you can’t blame Snopes for not listing a story is true before it happened.
No, the sign I saw wasn’t spray painted. It was white lettering on a plain black billboard, similar to the style of the parodies linked to earlier in this thread.
Someone on another board’s thread related to this subject posted the question “Why would someone make up a sign?” Good question. If you’ll look back on my postings, you’ll see I’m not a conspiracy freak or a UFO nut. Even as a pot smoker, I don’t find the billboard terribly offensive. It’s just the “good guys” taunting the “bad guys.” The DEA has done worse.
Snopes is just sloppy - from the design of the site to the effort that goes into the content. In the pumpkin story, they mention that a man actually did screw a pumpkin after the fact. Great. You wanna back that up, Snopes? Maybe a link, or at least a quote from the story. They didn’t even mention the name of the newspaper it came from! They might as well have claimed they received their information from their uncle’s mother’s poolboy!
You can’t debunk unsubstantiated claims with other unsubstantiated claims.
Cite for the pumpkin pumper.
I called them this morning. Unfortunately, the only person I was able to speak to was a secretary.
At first she seemed confused by my question, so I explained it slowly for her. She agreed with me that it sounded like a taunt and “doesn’t sound like something we would do, but I’m not sure.”
She said I could call back later and speak to an agent, but that they don’t come in until afternoon. I’m not sure I want to. Hell, I was nervous enough just talking to a secretary who was actually pretty friendly! My voice was stumbling all over the place and I was a bit paranoid (not stoned-paranoid, just regular paranoid; I wasn’t stoned).
I even called from a payphone. I mean I’m just a regular user and I know the DEA probably has no interest in me, but I’d still rather remain off their radar altogether. If someone with nothing to be paranoid about wants to call them, be my guest. Here are several phone numbers for them that I just found. Unfortunately, they don’t seem to provide an email address on their site.
Since I can provide no proof, I shall retract my claim. This doesn’t mean that I didn’t see the signs, but merely that I’m no longer asking anyone to believe me. Unlike certain websites, I don’t ask that people simply take my word for it.
Oh, and while I’m back on the subject :
Thanks, Tuckerfan. I know the incident really did happen. Earlier in this thread I linked to a SDMB thread with a link to a cite for it. My point wasn’t that Snopes was wrong in this particular instance, but that they couldn’t provide a simple cite for it - or for most of their debunkings for that matter. Now I understand that online news gets old and eventually gets taken off the server in many cases, but at least they could have used a fair-use quote from the article and mentioned their source.
Sheesh guys…I just want to know if this is true…start your own Great Debates or BBQ Pit thread about Snopes if you must.
…No freaking way I’m callin’ the DEA either. Although I no longer imbibe, I’m just paranoid enough to not want to risk getting any attention from them.
Surely one of us 26,000 Dopers can provide a picture…?..or maybe one of you (besides nuetron) is brave enough to call the DEA…
Perhaps Cecil might provide the straight dope.
This wouldn’t make any damn sense. Why would the DEA take such an obnoxious stand? What possible benefit would it have to them, other than trying to smugly demonstrate their superiority over drug users? If anything, it sounds like it might spur folks to action against the aims of the DEA.
Unless there’s a photo that isn’t an obvious forgery, there’s no reason to believe this is true. Multiple, unverified “sightings” over a number of years just clinch it further.
Done. No dice. I guess you could say, well, maybe someone at the DEA knows about it, but not the person I talked to. How far would you have to go, then, before you’ve talked with a satisfactory number of people?
“Put me through to the Director of Billboards!”
“Um, there is no Director of Billboards.”
“Well, if there were, who would it be?”