August 14, 2022, 05:08 PM | #1 | ||
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,313
|
Snopes and Guns
Quote:
Okay, if I’m running a ‘fact checking’ site, like Snopes, then I best make sure the stuff posted on my site is correct. It’s obvious Snopes was lazy or ignorant or both concerning the above quote from their site and I think it says something about their credibility. Background: Snopes is fact checking a poster that shows a black circle about three inches in diameter with the text: “This is the size of a hole made by an AR-15. Tell me again why you need that?” Snopes’ verdict on the poster is not ‘True’ and not ‘False’ but their rating is ‘Mixture’ which their definition is: Quote:
|
||
August 14, 2022, 08:35 PM | #2 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 30, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 773
|
If they had labeled it as the size of the exit hole I would be okay with it. I don’t expect them to be ballistic experts with a bunch of data that most people wouldn’t understand, or care about. That’s what sites like this are for.
|
August 14, 2022, 08:43 PM | #3 |
Member
Join Date: March 11, 2012
Posts: 43
|
I read the cited Snopes article which is from 2018. I do not see anything wrong with what Snopes held in the full article.
|
August 14, 2022, 09:35 PM | #4 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 25, 2011
Posts: 667
|
Total BS, show me a picture of an actual exit wound that size made from a .223 bullet.
__________________
Special Operations Combat Veteran Gunsmith, BS, MFA, Competitive Shooter NRA Certified Firearms Instructor [9 Certifications] |
August 14, 2022, 09:42 PM | #5 | |
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,468
|
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
|
August 15, 2022, 12:23 AM | #6 |
Staff
Join Date: March 20, 1999
Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia
Posts: 16,955
|
DaleA - which part of the quote in your post do you take exception with? If it is the "housed in bullets ..." part, I agree. That could be worded much better.
But if it is the "5.7 millimetres" part (which I think it might be since you added [sic] to the quote) then they are correct. I'm pretty sure you know this, but on a just-in-case basis .223 Rem bullets like almost all bullets for similar .22X calibers including the 5.56 NATO round are .224 inches in diameter which is 5.7 millimeters (5.69 to be exact). "millimetre is the international spelling for the length in question, "millimeter" is the American spelling. I doubt that is the problem you had with the statement. |
August 15, 2022, 12:29 AM | #7 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 30, 2009
Location: dallas
Posts: 773
|
I haven’t looked at snopes for years but I don’t consider them to be Google or any sort of expert on anything. They were just a source to disprove some of the ridiculous rumors that showed up or report on some of the latest scams on the internet.
|
August 15, 2022, 03:04 AM | #8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 12, 2002
Location: Twin Cities, MN
Posts: 5,313
|
You guys are giving me too much credit.
I'm PROBABLY making much to big of a deal about this but the thing that got me is the phrase: ".223 Remington cartridges, which are housed in bullets" how do the cartridges get housed in the bullets? And it just might be that I am WRONG...yeah it's happened right here on this site before. It could be I'm just not reading correctly or understanding the phrase. Mal H...like I said you're giving me too much credit about the word 'millimetres' because my spell checker flagged it and I didn't want folk thinking I mistyped it so I threw in the '[sic]' after it and now, thanks to you, I find out that Snopes was correct about their use of the word and I was wrong. I'm still don't get the 'cartridges housed in bullets' phrase though. However I'm willing to listen to an explanation and apologize if I also got that wrong. |
August 15, 2022, 06:12 AM | #9 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,896
|
Be that as it may, to translate 5.56 (universal cartridge designation) to "5.7" displays just a "bit" of unfamiliarity w/ the whole topic...
and casts a shadow on the source write-up as a whole. Not putting things in true context is the real problem, though, as the article goes into agonizing detail on what any high-speed bullet does since the Spanish-American War. But leaves the impression that the AR/223.5.56 is some new uber-destructive development. . Last edited by mehavey; August 15, 2022 at 06:17 AM. |
August 15, 2022, 06:28 AM | #10 |
Staff
Join Date: November 2, 1998
Location: Colorado
Posts: 21,840
|
Originally snopes was a leftist leaning husband-wife team that opined biased views while asserting itself as an authoritative source. It has long been outed and has lost credibility on the net.
__________________
Vigilantibus et non dormientibus jura subveniunt. Molon Labe! |
August 15, 2022, 06:37 AM | #11 |
Senior Member
Join Date: October 22, 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 988
|
All of the fact checking that Snopes ever did was on Google. Anyone can do the same. Nothing special about Snopes except that they are highly biased and it always shows. Whenever they do run a Google search, they look for stuff that backs them up and they don't check any of the sources for their quoted material.
Certainly not reliable. Truthorfiction.com is a better starting place for fact checking. --Wag--
__________________
"Great genius will always encounter fierce opposition from mediocre minds." --Albert Einstein. |
August 15, 2022, 09:41 AM | #12 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 20, 1999
Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia
Posts: 16,955
|
Quote:
I think we all can agree that "housed in" is not the proper way to say what he wanted to say. If you can get beyond that, and it isn't that hard to do, the article is fairly complete and accurate on the actual subject of debunking the image of the gargantuan hole that a bullet from an AR-15 makes. Note that the author of that article is Irish, but mostly educated in America. I think some of his Irish language background showed up in that piece. |
|
August 15, 2022, 10:41 AM | #13 | ||
Staff
Join Date: September 25, 2008
Location: CONUS
Posts: 18,468
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
NRA Life Member / Certified Instructor NRA Chief RSO / CMP RSO 1911 Certified Armorer Jeepaholic |
||
August 15, 2022, 11:30 AM | #14 | |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,839
|
Using the English language correctly is a nearly lost art these days, and using it incorrectly describing technical matters seems to be a new art form in and of itself.
Quote:
I am left to decide which of these is most likely.... The author is not a native English speaker and understands English grammar poorly... The author is ignorant of the correct use of terms.... Or, possibly a cut&paste error, either leaving some words out or scrambling word order to make a nonsensical statement. And while it may be just me, if someone shows me a 3" hole and says "“This is the size of a hole made by an AR-15." then I would ask them, "What part of the rifle did you shove through the target to make that hole?? The barrel?? pistol grip??.... sorry, your common slang is incorrect and inaccurate, but rifles don't make holes. Bullets fired from them do. OF course, the most common response will be "its the same thing!" but the reality is, it's not the same thing. And, I think if you claim to be a fact checker, you need to know AND USE the actual FACTS... or go to work for MSN/NBC writing their headlines....facts don't seem to matter much there....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
August 15, 2022, 12:14 PM | #15 |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,896
|
If someone ever says to me "...that 5.7 AR..." I'm looking around for
something aside from the lingua franca of 233/5.56 Honest question: Has anyone ever heard of the 223/5.56 cartridge (or bullet) being referred to as 5.7mm ? |
August 15, 2022, 12:59 PM | #16 |
Staff
Join Date: March 20, 1999
Location: Somewhere in the woods of Northern Virginia
Posts: 16,955
|
It's not the cartridge, it was never stated to be a cartridge or caliber designation! It's the diameter of the bullet expressed in millimeters which is very common almost everywhere except here in the US. What is so hard to understand about that? You are trying to make a simple statement about a dimension into something it isn't.
|
August 15, 2022, 02:13 PM | #17 |
Senior Member
Join Date: September 19, 2008
Posts: 1,411
|
No, but there are 5.7x28mm uppers available for an AR. That is what I would think of if someone said "5.7 AR".
__________________
-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+ All data is flawed, some just less so. |
August 15, 2022, 09:36 PM | #18 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,717
|
I love it. Some of y'all are really just looking for trouble, complaining about couple of minor errors on a 3rd party website instead of taking the more magnanimous position of being helpful and sending in some corrected information.
I am sure they would appreciate the insight with appropriate facts and verifiable links, LOL. https://www.snopes.com/contact/ Now, if you tried to be helpful and they blew you off, that might be another matter.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
August 16, 2022, 07:41 AM | #19 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: June 17, 2010
Location: Virginia
Posts: 6,896
|
Quote:
|
|
August 30, 2022, 06:33 PM | #20 | |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 6,165
|
Quote:
|
|
August 30, 2022, 08:54 PM | #21 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,839
|
The reputation, reliability, and credibility of anyone passing themselves off as "fact checkers" is 100% dependent on their accuracy, in ALL things.
fact checkers are expected to be impartial, unbiased and above all, accurate. Snopes fails this standard time and time again, sometimes, apparently intentionally. Any group, of any political leaning that fails the standard should not be considered a trustworthy source. about ANYTHING....
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
August 31, 2022, 11:45 AM | #22 |
Senior Member
Join Date: January 8, 2001
Location: Forestburg, Montague Cnty, TX
Posts: 12,717
|
And yet, their verification process is often spot on. With that said, their process includes their sources and you can verify with their sources and move on from there to find more information. Just like this forum, Snopes is a resource.
__________________
"If you look through your scope and see your shoe, aim higher." -- said to me by my 11 year old daughter before going out for hogs 8/13/2011 My Hunting Videos https://www.youtube.com/user/HornHillRange |
September 1, 2022, 01:04 PM | #23 |
Senior Member
Join Date: December 10, 2012
Posts: 6,165
|
Snopes is a biased resource. They are often just plain wrong.
|
September 1, 2022, 04:45 PM | #24 |
Staff
Join Date: March 11, 2006
Location: Upper US
Posts: 28,839
|
am reminded of the phrase, "sometimes, even a blind monkey finds a banana.."
Even though there are matters where their process is "spot on" and verifiable by independent sources, when you get caught "lying to the jury in the court of public opinion" (and, they have been), your credibility, about everything, goes in the crapper.
__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better. |
|
|