Slashdot Mirror

the email tax has already been banned (thanks snopes forums)

thanks google

More like "certifiably insane", if you ask me.

According to http://www.snopes.com/business/consumer/bastard.as p there's no supporting evidence for it.

Yes, my colon is legal.

But I bought my kidney very hush-hush from the back of a gray van.

the pics are listed here, along with an explanation of their origin.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/people/gates.asp

To me, these stories always have the look of something that belongs on Snopes, Urban Legends, all that is missing is the popular ending to this Geek folk tale "and he changed the shortcuts to launch Firefox, etc., and no one noticed." The familiar put-downs are there, Internet Exploder, Outlook Distress and, of course, Solitaire.

Never is friend or neighbor told "Change anything on my desktop and you die."

"Who Censored Roger Rabbit"

Not the animators, that's for sure.

I'm excited. Now I have stickers that magically extend my batteries' lives, as well as stickers that magically de-toxify my car's gasoline!

I wonder if the "nanoceramic" uses "holographic frequencies" too...

Ugh, stupid space pen myth won't die...

The Truth:

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

http://amos.indiana.edu/library/scripts/pens.html

Never happened, or at no one has ever shown it has. Just think about it anyway, it would take a reasonably good digital camera, nevermind a crappy built-in phone camera for the resolution to capture 1/4" numbers (and an exp date/name half that size) from at least 3-4 feet away.

I don't feel like pasting the whole Snopes article in here, but No, Al Gore did not claim he "invented" the Internet, nor did he say anything that could reasonably be interpreted that way.

--grendel drago

Not to rain on anyone's parade, but this isn't actually a "Teen Beat" photo: http://www.snopes.com/photos/people/gates.asp. Not that it matters, it actually seems worse knowing that this was a publicity shot.

One problem here: there aren't any

These images are actually publicity photos taken of the then 30-year-old Bill Gates coincident with the initial release of Microsoft Windows in 1985. The Corbis photo archive identifies their depiction thusly: "Bill Gates, CEO of Microsoft, reclines on his desk in his office soon after the release of Windows 1.0. 1985 Bellevue, Washington, USA."

First, for the people too terrified to follow that link, it is safe for work and will not burn your retinas like the original goatse. Second, those pictures aren't actually for Teen Beat, as claimed, but were promotional, in some weird alternate reality where that kind of thing could help promote your product.

So nobody clued in that this was a hoax?

The pictures were actually from a publicity shoot in 1985 for the initial release of Windows.

I see this quote thrown around quite a bit, so I looked it up on Snopes. Guess what? They've talked about it quite a bit, and no one can substantiate it. The only source for the quote comes from an atheist website. Boy, that's a shock, eh? Bush denies he said it, and the only semi-credible website that referenced it (MSN Encarta) has now removed it. If you've got REAL proof Bush 41 said this, post it.

It is unfortunate that these motherfuckingly horrendous creatures got to survive even with such a high percentage of marine life being wiped out. Why do the ugly motherfuckers always seem to survive? And does the reason also have something to do with michael surviving as an editor despite the fact that 90 % of Slashdot users hate him?

Apple is not his employer. You cannot be sued for your opinions yet. Don't say something un-pc, today you can can be arrested for peacefully quoting bible versus in public.

Snopes.com debunks this story. The photos are real, but they are NOT from Teen Beat magazine.

There are more people alive then dead.

That is pure urban legend, and quite a common one too. Read up this link for more info. The number of dead is approximately 60 billion, while the total population right now is around 7+

He was NOT in Teen Beat. This story is wrong, the second time in about as many days that Snopes has scooped Slashdot.

He was NOT in Teen Beat. This story is wrong, the second time in about as many days that Snopes has scooped Slashdot.

You mean getting a legislature to pass something completely idiotic? Too late, it's been done.

Nephilium

You know that the whole "Al Gore claimed to invent the internet" story is an urban legend created by republicans. See http://www.snopes.com/quotes/internet.htm

I thought I'd seen that one before...

On average one person is killed by lightning while talking on the phone each year.

200 mA is enough to kill you. Lightning apparently doesn't subscribe to the NEC standards on minimum allowed wire gauge.

Correct Linky

AC

Snopes debunks this story But that's not going to stop me using it to recommend one of my favourite books: A Fish Caught in Time: The Hunt for the Coelacanth, by Samantha Weinberger. I couldn't put it down and I had to blink back a tear at one point. Not bad for a factual book.

I thought I had seen these images before.
Sure enough, I had. From snopes we get the explanation:

they are genuine images of some rather strange deep-sea creatures, these photographs have nothing to do with the Indian Ocean tsunami. They date from mid-2003 and were taken as part of the NORFANZ voyage, a joint Australian-New Zealand research expedition conducted in May-June 2003 to explore deep sea habitats and biodiversity in the Tasman Sea. These photographs can be viewed on Australia's National Oceans Office web site.

As posted above, there is a much faster mirror at snopes.com. ;)

They may be weird fish, but they sure didn't wash up on shore from the tsunami! This story just isn't true.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/tsunami/creature.asp

http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/kathleenparker/ kp20040410.shtml
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040618/D839DV0O1 .html
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan. binladen/ (note date)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,36 04,314700,00.html (also note date)
http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page01.htm
http://www.kultursmog.com/Life-Page02.htm
http://www.independentsforkerry.org/uploads/media/ kerry-iraq.html
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.htm l
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/FD03Aa02.h tml on on the "worldwide support we have squandered"

Before people get too fired up about the outrageous lawsuits described by the "stella awards"...
They're bogus

But it's making you think it; just like subliminal messages which are illegal.

You're correct that they're illegal (at least in the US), but the fact is that they don't work.

who would have thought that all this time, people could have been eating rhesus phesus

I don't eat monkey shit, no matter how much I get thrown at me. I've been told it's nothing to phone home about.

1. A few of your rebukes cite past historical sins in christian societies ("our" societies) as analogies to the the acts of radical moslems coming from the respective societies ("their" societies).
A common argument made by many apologists is that "they" as a society are still evolving and going through the same problems we went through. To back up this argument "our" past errors are cited. Of which certainly we know quite a few. (BTW how much do we (or even they) know of their past? Is is openly dealt with?)
While it may be interesting discussing the merits of this theory, it begs the question: does that mean "they" are less capable then us, inferiour even? That we give them some leniency, kindly treat them the way we treat confused and troublesome children?
To the point: does that mean we don't criticize them the same way we critizes our own religions, our own politicians and our own clergy? We don't hold them up to higher standards?

I certainly hope not. I would hope that they don't either.
For this reason we as individuals should not refrain from criticizing failings of others and hold our standards to everyone equally high.

2. You cite a few examples of extremists in our societies, show that we have our own bad apples. Again a good point, maybe it would be good to just run a tally to see if we have the same density of extremists as they do...
But it shows a fault in their societies themselves: these kinds of opinions and actions do not come out of nowhere. People in their vincity know and tolerate this interpretation of Islam and maybe even their actions. Of the violent examples (IRA, ETA) you stated, I would assume that "our" offenders had to conceal their identies. They had to be carefull not to be discovered or betrayed. One just doesn't have the impression that radical islamic terrorists worry much about being betrayed by people that know of their opinion and deeds.

3. All comparisons you make are only qualititave comparisons not quantitative. To "sexual mutilation of millions of little girls and the savage oppression of women" you counter "sexual mutilation of infant boys" (you certainly mean sexual abuse by very sick clergy men in the US, you certainly aren't speaking of circumcision are you?)
It would be laughable to assume the numbers could be compared. Also in the US the church is being held responsible (morally as well as legally) for the sick deeds these men have made and the almost equally sick decisions the church has made to hush-hush it over the decades. This owning up to mistakes does not take place in their societies.

4. Your rebuke to the point concerning the videos was shown to be false in the above poster: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cnn.htm

5. Concerning Oklahoma City, the Pope and the Archbishop. They sent their condolences (search it with google, I did). I can imagine the Pope sends his condolences each time a catastrophy happens. Dito the Archbishop. But I am also certain that had the bomber cited "The Christian-Catholic God" as being his moral compass that the Pope would have publicly condemned this man. As would have all christian priests in their churches. Openly, they would have gone to great efforts to avoid any possible misunderstanding and to make clear that they have absolutley no sympathies for this kind of act. Unfortunately to often moslem-arab imams are the moral compasses and inspiration for terrorists. Why is it so hard to hear all other imams publicly condemning this? If these people have hijacked their religion why are they not publicly shunned and denounced? How is it that these people can use their churches for their agitational-inspirational meetings? Where is the public opposition?
Why do they not insist that it not be called 'jidah' anymore? 'Jidah' means 'struggle' for the faith in oneself and with

>> Why did millions of the practitioners of the religion of peace laugh,
>> cheer and dance in the street because 3,000 innocent men, women and
>> children were murdered by seventeen men who supposedly hijacked the
>> religion of peace?

> Why do anti-Muslim bigots keep clinging to this Urban myth? The
> "video" of which you allude was of about 30 people in the Occupied
> West Bank. Some of the videos shown on Fox later turned out to be
> library footage of Palestinians celebrating the 1993 peace accord,
> NOT a celebration of 9\11.

Wrong.
http://www.snopes.com/rumors/cnn.htm

You're wrong about the pen.

And you're confusing federal budgets with state budgets. My roads are well kept and cleared, because my town took responsiblilty for the local roads. The State keeps the Mass Pike clear and repaired.. We won't mention the Big Dig. So don't bring that up.

We lost a lot of federal money for schools when Bush took over, that's true, but we managed to build replacement schools for schools built in ~1900 and we can keep our teachers, not well paid, but paid.

uh, not exactly.

Green marker. for normal CDs, yellow for those with MP3s ;-)

I don't understand why people get so crazy about calling people anti-semites. Are we not allowed to criticize the Israeli government at all? So we should just let the Israeli government do anything they want, simply because they're Jewish? I think giving this amount of trust to any government is unwise to say the least.

Some people are completely insane when it comes to charges of "anti-semitism." I read once, and you can read it here, that Starbucks closed all of their stores in Israel for fear of terrorism. A group of Jewish Americans decided that this was anti-semitism, noting that Starbucks continues to do business in Arab countries.

The problem with this logic is that: (1) it neglects to mention that the other countries were not getting bombed, and (2) the Jewish Americans assumed other Arab countries to be "the enemy," which I would say, is racist.

This is a typical example of how crazy, irrational, and racist vehement supporters of Israel can be. Concern for safety is equated with anti-semitism. While they are running around calling other people racist, they are blatantly racist against Arabs, and demand that everyone 100% unconditionally support the Israeli government in every way. Anything less than that is akin to Hitler!

Wake up, my friend. The Israeli government is not infallible. People can have gripes with Israel that are completely reasonable, and not hateful. Human beings make mistakes and do bad things. Governments do bad things. It's not wise to trust governments. And, I think, as far as governments go, Israel is far from perfect in its approaches. Their record on human rights, for example, is not a shining beacon of hope and inspiration.

That, and my advice to you is, calm down. There aren't anti-semites at every corner of every street just WAITING to destroy Israel and start another Holocaust.

While there's no doubt that the Sun was entirely at fault here for their poor handling of the affair, it's not hard to see how they could believe that Disney let a swear word slip by. Even ignoring simple accidents like the infamous penis-columns on the Little Mermaid artwork and debatably subjective interpretations like the hidden word "SEX" in the Lion King, there have been a number of cases where "offensive material" appeared in Disney films.

For instance, they had to change the lyrics to the Aladdin title song because Arab-American groups complained. Someone snuck in shots of Baby Herman flipping the bird, and a topless woman in The Rescuers.

How many consumers in western nations are aware that cartridges can be forged? (Software is one thing, CD's/DVD's also, but cartridges?) Given the cutthroat pace of modern media, it's hardly surprising that the Sun rushed to print with this one, once making that assumption.

I think the real story here is not that the Sun screwed up. I think the real story lies in finding out where that pirated game came from, and more importantly, how many pirated cartridges are out there. One would hope the Sun would lead the charge on this investigation.

While there's no doubt that the Sun was entirely at fault here for their poor handling of the affair, it's not hard to see how they could believe that Disney let a swear word slip by. Even ignoring simple accidents like the infamous penis-columns on the Little Mermaid artwork and debatably subjective interpretations like the hidden word "SEX" in the Lion King, there have been a number of cases where "offensive material" appeared in Disney films.

For instance, they had to change the lyrics to the Aladdin title song because Arab-American groups complained. Someone snuck in shots of Baby Herman flipping the bird, and a topless woman in The Rescuers.

How many consumers in western nations are aware that cartridges can be forged? (Software is one thing, CD's/DVD's also, but cartridges?) Given the cutthroat pace of modern media, it's hardly surprising that the Sun rushed to print with this one, once making that assumption.

I think the real story here is not that the Sun screwed up. I think the real story lies in finding out where that pirated game came from, and more importantly, how many pirated cartridges are out there. One would hope the Sun would lead the charge on this investigation.

While there's no doubt that the Sun was entirely at fault here for their poor handling of the affair, it's not hard to see how they could believe that Disney let a swear word slip by. Even ignoring simple accidents like the infamous penis-columns on the Little Mermaid artwork and debatably subjective interpretations like the hidden word "SEX" in the Lion King, there have been a number of cases where "offensive material" appeared in Disney films.

For instance, they had to change the lyrics to the Aladdin title song because Arab-American groups complained. Someone snuck in shots of Baby Herman flipping the bird, and a topless woman in The Rescuers.

How many consumers in western nations are aware that cartridges can be forged? (Software is one thing, CD's/DVD's also, but cartridges?) Given the cutthroat pace of modern media, it's hardly surprising that the Sun rushed to print with this one, once making that assumption.

I think the real story here is not that the Sun screwed up. I think the real story lies in finding out where that pirated game came from, and more importantly, how many pirated cartridges are out there. One would hope the Sun would lead the charge on this investigation.

For those who don't quite know the connection between Domino's and anti-abortion...

This is one of the reasons why I love the Snopes Urban Legends site. Not only do the stories tend to be well-researched, they list references at the bottom and the writers tend to admit when they're unsure about their sources of information and/or conclusions. ^_^ The wacky humor and illustrations are nice too.

I disagree! Snopes to the rescue!

They may say that, but they're wrong.

We use 100% of our brains.

Ever seen a stoke victim? Yes, losing even a fraction of a percent of your brain material can devestate your functionality.

This story?
Fictional stories are cool, but I prefer mine with wizards and dragons, or atleast a guy collecting 2 of an impossibly large amount of species all on a small arc.