# snopes **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 12, 2003, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551 "2003-12-12T07:20:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/1 "2003-12-12T07:20:51Z")
Is snopes ever wrong? Or is their arrogance just too powerful to rebuke? ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/2 "2003-12-12T07:39:27Z")
Case in point: [http://www.snopes.com/language/phrases/1500.htm](http://www.snopes.com/language/phrases/1500.htm) Don’t they need to preface almost all of their commentary with IMHO? Where’s their proof? Or is it - because I said so? ---
**Author:** ![heresiarch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@heresiarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heresiarch)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 7:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/3 "2003-12-12T07:43:40Z")
Well, I think they were wrong about the infamous “Newlywed Show” quote\*. But IIRC, they just said that it was “highly doubtful”, so technically, they weren’t wrong. \*[In response to a question from host Bob Eubanks about the “most unusual place you’ve ever made whoopee,” a female Newlywed Game contestant responded, “That would be up the butt, Bob.”](http://www.snopes.com/radiotv/tv/newlywed.htm) They’ve updated their report, and now list this as **True**. ---
**Author:** ![MrTuffPaws](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f475e1/32.png) [@MrTuffPaws](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrTuffPaws)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/4 "2003-12-12T07:57:40Z")
I vote for their arrogance. Not only that, but they certainly like to through political or social opinions into the fray. Their article about Sean Penn’s NY time’s one page advertisement made me double think their slant. In fact, just after looking at their page, I noticed that they took down the sex category. WTF, are they funded by the RNC or something now? ---
**Author:** ![heresiarch](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/278dde/32.png) [@heresiarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heresiarch)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 7:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/5 "2003-12-12T07:57:52Z")
I don’t really understand, **cc** - On that link they provide explanations for all of the facts they cite and sources for most of them. And then they follow it up with a bibliography of ten sources. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 8:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/6 "2003-12-12T08:04:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by heresiarch \* > \*\*I don’t really understand, **cc** - On that link they provide explanations for all of the facts they cite and sources for most of them. And then they follow it up with a bibliography of ten sources. \*\* Yeah, on some of the points they do reference cites to support their opinions. But I am afraid a lot of people are then duped into thinking ALL of their opinions are therefor irrefutable. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 8:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/7 "2003-12-12T08:15:22Z")
Dirt poor is an American expression, not a British one. Claims that the saying grew out of British class distinctions as measured by style of flooring are just plain silly. - Cite? The earliest documented use of the phrase graveyard shift comes from a 1907 Collier’s Magazine. However, graveyard watch was noted in 1895, with that term referring to a shipboard watch beginning at midnight and lasting usually four hours. - Therefor this saying was definitely not coined in the 16th century? Mice, rats, and bugs definitely take up residence in thatch roofs — to them it’s a highrise hay mow. Cats and dogs, however, don’t go up there. - And snopes knows this because? ETC. ---
**Author:** ![I\_can\_t\_believe\_that\_s\_butter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8edcca/32.png) [@I\_can\_t\_believe\_that\_s\_butter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_can_t_believe_that_s_butter)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 8:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/8 "2003-12-12T08:23:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MrTuffPaws \* > \*\* In fact, just after looking at their page, I noticed that they took down the sex category. WTF, are they funded by the RNC or something now? \*\* Well, if you type into the search engine “Risque Business”, the good ones—er, I mean the sexual legends are accessible. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/9 "2003-12-12T14:43:15Z")
People that take snopes at face value are most likely the people that believe everything they hear on the 6 o’clock news. People that use snopes as a cite are most likely the people that use 60 Minutes as a cite. Lemmings. IMHO. ---
**Author:** ![Umbriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/9de053/32.png) [@Umbriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Umbriel)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/10 "2003-12-12T14:55:45Z")
I’d imagine that the redesignation of the “sex” category as “risque business” was to assist would-be visitors whose workplace internet filters would otherwise have blocked them. At least, that’s been the effect… ---
**Author:** ![Alex-NC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/a587f6/32.png) [@Alex-NC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alex-NC)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/11 "2003-12-12T15:21:34Z")
Snopes was wrong about the Saudi’s, including some of Osama’s family, being allowed to fly out of the US days after 9/11. Snopes said that it wasn’t true for about 2 years. Recently someone from the Gov. admitted that The Bush people allowed a charter flight to pick these people up and fly out when ALL aviation in the country was grounded with the exception of military flights. Note this news didn’t make a blip on your mainstream, corprorate run media. ---
**Author:** ![Dung\_Beetle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dung_beetle/32/7945_2.png) [@Dung\_Beetle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dung_Beetle)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/12 "2003-12-12T16:58:37Z")
> [@](#): > > People that use snopes as a cite are most likely the people that use 60 Minutes as a cite. Oops…that’s me. But instead of being annoyed, I’m now wishing I had thought of calling myself “Lemming”. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/13 "2003-12-12T17:20:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dung Beetle \* > \*\*Oops…that’s me. But instead of being annoyed, I’m now wishing I had thought of calling myself “Lemming”. \*\* 😃 I’m not trying to say snopes is 100 percent bullshit. But there is a fair amount of bullshit on snopes, I just hope people realize it. ---
**Author:** ![Rico](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rico/32/3582_2.png) [@Rico](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rico)\ **Post date:** [December 12, 2003, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/14 "2003-12-12T23:41:17Z")
Has anyone ever checked out the “Lost Legends” section of Snopes? At the bottom of each of those stories is a link leading to “More Information About This Page” There is a long explanation about the supposed truth of these stories, and how you should do research with MANY sites, not just Snopes, when you are presented with a claim. Here’s an excerpt of the piece: > [@](#): > > What’s an aspiring skeptic to do when common sense whispers one thing and a trusted source shouts another? > > The answer is startlingly simple: Look for more information. That internal taffy-pull should be interpreted as a sign that more legwork is needed before a position — pro or con — can be adopted. Rather than arbitrarily throwing belief in either direction (“My teacher wouldn’t lie” versus “My teacher must be wrong about this”), make the effort to find out which is right, this time by consulting a variety of sources. > > Among other things (including providing a good read and some wonderful belly laughs), we hope this site helps our visitors learn to judge the quality of information presented to them. We’d like to think those who stop by here learn a little something about what steps to mentally take when pondering the eternal “hoax or true?” question. As wonderfully gratifying as it is to be regarded as infallible, we’d much rather see our visitors discover the key to their own abilities. What the Mikkelsons are trying to do with the Snopes site is debunk some of the popular urban legends and internet hoaxes out there. They do not claim infallibility (as evidenced by the recent “Newlywed Game” revelation by Bob Eubanks that the infamous “in the butt, Bob” answer was actually true), their only purpose is to be a place where you can go to research something. It’s merely a good starting point. And it should be used as such. ---
**Author:** ![knock\_knock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/22d042/32.png) [@knock\_knock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/knock_knock)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/15 "2003-12-13T01:46:36Z")
That’s an [excellent question](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=212900), **ccwaterback**. We didn’t get many well-supported, specific examples of Snopes mistakes in that thread, besides the Newlywed Game one that has already been mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/16 "2003-12-13T02:38:30Z")
**ccwaterback**. When you say, in criticism, of snopes, > [@](#): > > Dirt poor is an American expression, not a British one. Claims that the saying grew out of British class distinctions as measured by style of flooring are just plain silly. > > Cite? Hey, champ You’re the one suggesting that snopes is wrong on this and other things. If you thing that the phrase “dirt poor” DIDN"T originate in the US, then YOU come up with a cite and the origin. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/17 "2003-12-13T02:54:30Z")
**cc** You then picked on snopes by suggesting that their statement > [@](#): > > The earliest documented use of the phrase graveyard shift comes from a 1907 Collier’s Magazine. However, graveyard watch was noted in 1895, with that term referring to a shipboard watch beginning at midnight and lasting usually four hours. was incorrect and not proven by a cite. If you can’t understand that they just cited their source, and you have cited NOTHING to refute it, then you need to do your homework. And, when you say > [@](#): > > I’m not trying to say snopes is 100 percent bullshit. But there is a fair amount of bullshit on snopes, I just hope people realize it. You need to start providing evidence as to where they are wrong. A “fair amount” is a pretty strong statement. They quite often post info that is state-of-the-art at the time. If the US Government chooses to release the true info later, how can you blame them for writing the original article? As to the “up the butt legend” they wrote what was a state of the art article for many years. If someone had offered the proof that the out-take clip existed, they would have changed their opinion. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/18 "2003-12-13T03:23:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by samclem \* > \*\*Hey, champ You’re the one suggesting that snopes is wrong on this and other things. If you thing that the phrase “dirt poor” DIDN"T originate in the US, then YOU come up with a cite and the origin. \*\* “Dirt floor” originated in the US? That’s just silly. See, I can be pompous too. If WE the SDMB posters must back up our assertions with cites, why shouldn’t we require our cites to do the same? It just seems to me a lot of people have taken snopes to be the Holy Grail of the internet. If snopes says it’s true, it’s true. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/19 "2003-12-13T04:11:02Z")
> [@](#): > > “Dirt floor” originated in the US? That’s just silly. You obviously missed what I said. I said “dirt poor.” Can you cite where it first was used? Country? Date? I can. Can you? Put up or shut up. Then you said > [@](#): > > If WE the SDMB posters must back up our assertions with cites, why shouldn’t we require our cites to do the same? It just seems to me a lot of people have taken snopes to be the Holy Grail of the internet. If snopes says it’s true, it’s true. You have provided NOTHING as far as cites for your assertions. Snopes almost always provides cites. Could you be bothered to provide a cite as to any one of your various assertions? If snopes says it’s true, then it’s almost always true. Perhaps a 1% error rate. Barbara spends obviously more time researching her assertions than you have. ---
**Author:** ![ccwaterback](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/df705f/32.png) [@ccwaterback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ccwaterback)\ **Post date:** [December 13, 2003, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551/20 "2003-12-13T05:32:34Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by samclem \* > \*\*If snopes says it’s true, then it’s almost always true. Perhaps a 1% error rate. \*\* Cite? [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/snopes/218551.md?page=2)