Faun
Diamond Member
- Nov 14, 2011
- 123,597
- 78,553
- 2,635
I refuted them. All I ignored was the 1000 posts of whining about the Mikkelson's you posted. I responded to the claims they were wrong.Don't just say they were wrong ... prove it. The Saudi's would have had to fly out on the 12th. Prove that happened....Flights resumed on 9/13 ...And another...
Okay, I'm confused about the snopes/moore/bin laden story.
Here (Flights of Fancy) is the Snopes article on the topic. Other websites I've found say Snopes changed their answer from "False" to some sort of true-ish value. But the article I just linked to says "false" and categorically states that bin laden family members were not allowed to fly during the no-fly period just after 9/11.
What gives? Did Snopes correct their correction? Was Moore wrong after all?
CNN.com - Flights resume, but situation remains tense - September 14, 2001
Here's A story of the Saudi's begin flown out on 9/13...
October 2003: Craig Unger Saudia Arabia
....while the pilot recalled all flights were grounded, he might not have been aware that order was lifted earlier that same morning.
The snopes article reads...
First, we found no evidence that any flights of Saudi nationals, domestic or international, took place before the reopening of national airspace on the morning of September 13, 2001. To the contrary, every flight we have identified occurred after national airspace reopened.
So where are they wrong?
Yes. They were.
There are 2 photos and the first one appears untouched. The second photo shows the sign in it's actual location, but flipped it so the contents would be visible. I agree there should be notice the second image was touched but they still got the article right.They were also wrong in not acknowledging that the crashed airplane photo was photo shopped. I grant you it's mainly a joke, but the fact remains that the picture isn't real, and they say it is. There are many, many more. Most are harmless, such as the airplane crash picture, but there are some that are outright fiction. There are plenty of threads on the Straight Dope website that show the errors they have made and their unwillingness to change them.
The claim: Photograph shows small plane crashed into a tree next to a sign advertising flight lessons.
Status: True
and it is true.
If the bet you can muster is them posting a touched up photo along with an untouched photo to show their rating of true is accurate, you've got nothing.
Find an article they rated wrong...?
Personally, I believe just on odds alone, there's gotta be at least one -- but I've yet to find one.
They do lean left in that most of their articles debunk rightarded nonsense more than lefttarded nonsense, but so what, who gives a fuck? It's accuracy that matters, not hurt feelings because they're not balanced.
You've been shown several. Like a typical prog though, you ignore them.
I explained how snopes got the Emery story right as there was no "emergency counseling." Nothing in the chicken article was identified as wrong. And the story of a plane crashing next to a sign advertising flying lessons was true, as they claimed.
So can you prove the Saudi's were flown out while all flights were grounded or are you just gonna stomp your feet and claim snopes was wrong without being able to prove it...?