To be honest, anything that looks like it’s got holes eaten into it TOTALLY squicks me out.
Even this image of Saturn’s moon Hyperion kinda creeps me out.
So I may be a little hypersensitive.
I think the medical journal photo was real. They said there was only one case known so the email pic was fake. The others looked like cancer to me.
I am now going to barf.
It’s also a UL that Al Gore has an Academy Award
Oh yeah. The medical journal pics totally squik me out. Those look real.
Similarly, I’m sure that Snopes is wrong about the racist “doe knob” UL being false. I saw footage of the incident in question many years ago. I know it really happened. The fact that the networks deny it means nothing. It was a horribly racist incident that made the show look bad; of course they don’t want to admit it.
I believe Snopes is wrong in their negative calorie food article where they claim that the ingestion of celery can result in negative calories. It seems most Dopers that have discussed this in past threads agree as does the Fitness Nerd.
The math does seem kinda odd on that:
An 8-inch stalk of celery has 6 calories.
6 calories is roughly equivalent to an “average” person walking the length of a football field.
It seems like that would require more energy than processing a stalk of celery, but maybe not.
However, if you were taking the ongoing calorie burn just to maintain “living” (something like 75-100/hour), I think a person would have a really hard time eating just celery to keep there body going. That would about a pound of celery per hour, 24 hours a day.:eek:
I know of at least one article that’s been removed entirely. This was a long time ago (the message board at snopes then was that ‘outline’ form message board of the 90’s).
The article said that some congressman had argued his way out of a DUI by saying he was heading to Capitol Hill, and there’s a provision in the constitution (Article I, Section 6) that a congressperson can’t be arrested if on the way to a session of congress.
They marked it as true, and that the congressman was correct and did have that legal protection.
The stop by a Virginia cop for DUI did happen, and the cop got bullied out of arresting him, but his interpretation of the constitution was wrong.
A lawyer posted on the message board that the Supreme Court ruled half a century ago that Article I Section 6’s provision on arrest only pertains to civil arrest, not criminal.
Snopes (the husband, who seems like the less friendly of the pair) got a bit - terse, after having been - dismissive and pompous. A few weeks later the whole article vanished.
I can’t find the name of the congressman now. I did search snopes for ‘constitution arrest’ to confirm the article is still gone.
The interesting thing about the Newlywed controversy was that the reasons to doubt the story were still good ones. The evidence put forward to support the claim was chiefly the vivacity of recall multiple people had about it. When the clip surfaced, those keenly remembered details turned out to be inaccurate. Even more telling was the way those too-vivid-to-be-misremembered details were suddenly beside the point.
I had an issue with the fact that they once claimed that “mad” in “mad hatter” did not mean “insane” until somewhat recently. I tracked down sources that showed it did in fact have that meaning in multiple authors through the history of English literature. I see now that they have elaborated on the explanation, and that the theory that “mad” meant “venomous” in support of the idea that “hatter” was a play on “adder” is given less prominence, but I still think I discredited their source on that.
You mentioned as much in this great thread from 2001. One of my favorite threads of all time. I wonder if anything more definitive has come up in the last nine years.
But one of the points they make over and over again in TV/radio related ULs is that there are ALWAYS people who SWEAR that they actually saw/heard it in person, and the vast majority of the time, they simply did not.
That’s why they’re more inclined to trust the broadcasters than the listeners/viewers: because usually, the latter is simply going on some kind of false memory when it comes to these things.
Yeah… I need to put down the Wii, because the first thought I had when I saw the dreaded lotus boob pic just now was, “Damn that would make a fun Mario Galaxy 2 level!”
After I posted, I wondered if I might conveniently mis-remembered how strong a case I had made back then. But thanks to your link, I see that I had in fact taken the argument apart more soundly than I remembered. Thanks. I would hate to have been caught out right after I made a rant about other people’s confabulated memories.
Sigh. I wish the OP would have warned that it was the lotus nipple. I can usually handle shock images but that one always gets to me. Not sure why it does that to me where, say, goatse doesn’t.
Well, I suppose instead of
I should have said
or
but I chose to leave the decision to click on the link up to you.
Well I suppose I should have made it even more clear that the lotus nipple is a special case for me. I don’t think you did anything wrong, I just wish that I knew going in which shock image I was going to see. Don’t sweat it.
I know that Snopes once took about eight months to make a correction that I’d sent to them, with full documentation. A friend had looked up the story about Grace Slick naming her baby “god,” and Snopes cited one story–from Grace herself–which contradicted what I remembered reading at the time. I checked in at the library the next day, and found the reference, which I sent right in, but they sure took their time about making the correction.
I know of two other articles that Snopes once had and deleted. Around 2000 there was one about some Internet-startup company giving away free stock “just like Travelzoo”. Now if you search for Travelzoo you get bupkis.
The other was a legend that has since been proved true: Clement Clark Moore not being the real author of “A Visit from Santa Claus.” If you look on the Christmas legends page now, you’ll not find hide nor hair of that article. You’d think they’d just update it instead of sending it down the memory hole, but no.
That was the most grotesque photo I’ve ever seen in my entire life. You should be beaten within an inch of your life, and then an inch further, for not providing some sort of warning.