wobblerlorri: (Default)
Did you know that debunking urban legends has a liberal bias? It's true! At least that's what a holier-than-thou self-proclaimed preacher on my vestibulopathy list claims.

One of the gullible types on there passed around that old chestnut about the lawyer who bought a box of incredibly expensive cigars, insured them against fire, smoked them all, then filed a claim that he lost them in a fire. Blah blah blah. If you want to read it, go to the link, not gonna post the damn thing here.

As is my wont when I read one of these far-fetched pieces of shit, I went to Snopes.com, my general go-to site, found the above debunkage, and sent the link along with a terse "It's not true." Generally that puts paid to it.

But no. Self-Proclaimed preacher (this guy also said the way to cure depression, actual clinical, medically diagnosed depression that only responds to medication, was to PRAY, for da LAWD yea verily did close de MOUTHS of de LIONS when Daniel was behold FLUNG in amongst them praise JEEEEbus) comes back with this jewel (spelling errors intact):

Though this story semms a litle farfetched, it is definately funny. Hearing and reading many things nowadays about our justice system, could happen.

As far as Snopes is concerned they've been proven to slant their info. Very liberal bias.

Now, there was nothing the least bit political about this. But SPP (abbreviating because I'm tired of typing Self-Proclaimed Preacher) immediately has to put an eeebul LIBRUL SCUM spin on it. Folks who've followed me for a couple years or more may remember the Great Mail List Fucknuttery of 2009; well, SPP is one of the combatants who supported Illiterate Fundie Fucknut.

At any rate, after I retrieved my jaw from the floor, I posted this:

There are other sources that debunk it. Snopes.com is just the easiest to use. Here, have some others:





It's just not true. There's no "liberal bias" involved in debunking urban legends. Does truth have a "liberal bias"?

So now I'm going to sit back and see what happens. It's been almost 2 years since the last Major Angsty Dealio on the list... it's due.
wobblerlorri: (Default)
Just got back from our yearly pilgrimage to Longhorn Steakhouse, where Mike and I indulged in the 8 oz Top Sirloin Steak, medium well. Cheaper than Flo's Filet, and just as tasty. We ate cleanly, just a side salad for me, fries for him -- the stars of the show were the steaks.

Nom nom nom. Now I am stuffed, replete, satiated. Ho mangiato bene. 私はよく食べている. Jeg har spist godt. Yr wyf wedi bwyta yn dda. I have eaten well.

Don't know what's for supper, and I could give a flying fuck at a rolling donut. I had me some STEAK.
wobblerlorri: (Default)
We have a response! SPP has fired back his highly brilliant salvo:

who made snopes the final answer. To me "TRUTH" is a person.

Okey dokey. I guess he's saying that, since Snopes.com is a website, the answers aren't provided by people. Guess he told me.

Because I'm genuinely puzzled by the mental machinations of these sorts of people, I couldn't resist responding:

Well, Snopes.com has been around for donkey's years, and it's run by people. Barbara and David P. Mikkelson. It's just the one most people are familiar with.

The other sites I listed are also all run by people. Those people do the research into whether or not something is true or false.

How far do you want to go with it? You could even research something yourself to find out if it's true. You know, truth doesn't have anything to do with a person's religious or political preference -- truth is truth. Or rather, facts are facts.

I wait with bated breath for his next soaringly intellectual riposte. I'm sure it'll just blow my mind.


wobblerlorri: (Default)

July 2011

24 252627282930

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated 9/20/17 08:12 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios