Yeah, I know, facts are for lefty liberals. Don't suppose you can point to 3 mistakes Snopes has made, or any they didn't correct, can you? (Not conservative nonsense opinion, factual mistakes.)

Who told you that? They dropped >10% in one day because their earnings reports came out, and we're dismal (because they're reeling from Russian incursions on both platforms costing them billions to finally address), as were future projected earnings....not because they finally started blocking identified Russian conservative trolls.

For someone claiming to not be on FB or Twitter you have a track record of spreading the nonsense they both spout, often on the day these conservative Twitter/Facebook campaigns begin. You're pretty in the loop to be outside it.

Question....what is your Cheeto in chief doing to stop the Russians from interfering again this time, seeing as they've already been caught trying to hack American companies, organizations, government officials, and voting machines this year? Nothing yet, nada, according to the heads of the departments that should be spearheading our efforts. No direction at all from the Whitehouse on this issue, only constant public contradiction of their findings with no basis for that contradiction.

And I use snopes as the fact check. That like letting Russia do our Election vote count.

FYI. I don’t twitter not FB.

FYI FB stock dropped 20% This week. When the report came out that they blocked conservative. By 93%. But any leftist lie is ok.

Lol....yeah, you get your news from Twitter, Facebook, and Trump himself and I'm the one who buys the lies. No surprise you and the walk away people won't admit it, you've never admitted to being duped even though it's a daily occurrence. Funny they didn't disavow these memes until well after they were debunked, and they still claim the spread through conservative media is somehow proof of a mass exodus from the Democrats, even though every example they have is either stock photos or well known long term conservative activists and most retweets are Russian bots.

BTW, not from MSM......https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/walkaway-campaign-stock-photos/
And
https://videosift.com/video/Stephen-Examines-The-Conservative-Walk-Away-Memes

You're doing the Russian's work for them, trying to hand America to Putin. I expect you to respond "that's better than a liberal".

Edit: The funniest part here is there is a huge walk away movement happening....lifelong Republicans walking away from the Republican party because some are intelligent enough to see it's been co opted by unpatriotic morons who seem intent on dissolving our system of government and international standing in favor of Russia, who they still remember is our enemy, not NATO.
Oops, looks like you bought more Russian lies.....Again.

I guess the best evidence yet is that the only real charges levied against anyone, the only people actually arrested are from the Trump camp.

There's this: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/two-clinton-employees-arrested-destroying-evidence-uranium-probe-begins/

But, as scopes points out, that story is not actually true.

Keep on beating your drum about how everyone in the Trump camp is so innocent, we'll keep actually arresting them and charging them while you follow the propaganda.

Oh and the EPA admin resigned today amid ethics scandals. I'll look forward to seeing him behind bars while you keep chanting "LOCK HER UP" without anything actually happening to her.

Who is the Executive in charge of the Justice Department again?

Had doubts about the veracity of this due to the can being open already at the beginning, but per Snopes it's plausible. Basically brake cleaner is an organic solvent while Monster has a high level of acidity - they can both clean things, but would be useful on completely different types of grime.

From Snopes https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/machine-automatically-sorting-colored-balls/

False.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/david-hogg-on-campus-rumor-hoax/

OMG I had to check Snopes.

That thing is real!

It also violates several sections of the US flag code. (ie this is considered "disrespectful" to the flag.) Using it as a blanket, letting it droop to the floor, or draping it over anything are all violations.

But Trumpians don't care about ACTUALLY disrespecting the flag. They just care when black people are doing anything resembling protest and they'll make it about the flag or other cultural institutions (which they've shown time and again they don't really care about) if they can possibly twist it that way.

You're kidding, right? You dismiss snopes which clearly you didn't read since you claimed he offered no peer reviewed data that was included there, but you link quora.com and snidely tell me to read twice?! Lol.

From quora.com "Quora is not a source of information or an editor of information. Quora is a forum, just like yahoo answers. So basically Quora is neither credible and neither not credible."

Not so good, absolutely not peer reviewed, but I read it anyway....and I note it repeatedly misleadingly shows OVERALL homicide rates, not the topic (firearm homicides), except at the very end to claim looking at just firearm homicide rates when discussing firearm laws and their efficacy is dumb because murder is murder, and to try to pretend the trend hadn't reversed and shot up for years before the law change at the fastest rate on the chart, and reversed sharply again shortly afterwards, instead claiming a relatively steady decline (I guess hoping we won't look closely at the graph).
Looking at just firearm homicide rates seems to tell a different story.

The other two you mentioned weren't linked, so I bothered to search out the first to find it's behind pay walls, so unavailable...not wasting my time twice. I'll have to assume they're the same caliber.
You claim you personally produced some peer reviewed studies, what about them? You must have them available for free where they were reviewed and published, no? So far, you aren't convincing.

Snopes included excerpts from at least two peer reviewed studies directly on topic that seem to contradict your contention....why dismiss it offhand?

In a peer-reviewed paper published by American Law and Economics Review in 2012, researchers Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University found that in the decade following the NFA, firearm homicides (both suicides and intentional killings) in Australia had dropped significantly:

In 1997, Australia implemented a gun buyback program that reduced the stock of firearms by around one-fifth (and nearly halved the number of gun-owning households). Using differences across states, we test[ed] whether the reduction in firearms availability affected homicide and suicide rates. We find that the buyback led to a drop in the firearm suicide rates of almost 80%, with no significant effect on non-firearm death rates. The effect on firearm homicides is of similar magnitude but is less precise [somewhere between 35% and 50%].

Similarly, Dr. David Hemenway and Mary Vriniotis of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center found in 2011 that the NFA had been “incredibly successful in terms of lives saved”:

For Australia, the NFA seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved. While 13 gun massacres (the killing of 4 or more people at one time) occurred in Australia in the 18 years before the NFA, resulting in more than one hundred deaths, in the 14 following years (and up to the present), there were no gun massacres.

The NFA also seems to have reduced firearm homicide outside of mass shootings, as well as firearm suicide. In the seven years before the NFA (1989-1995), the average annual firearm suicide death rate per 100,000 was 2.6 (with a yearly range of 2.2 to 2.9); in the seven years after the buyback was fully implemented (1998-2004), the average annual firearm suicide rate was 1.1 (yearly range 0.8 to 1.4). In the seven years before the NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate per 100,000 was .43 (range .27 to .60) while for the seven years post NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate was .25 (range .16 to .33)

Additional evidence strongly suggests that the buyback causally reduced firearm deaths. First, the drop in firearm deaths was largest among the type of firearms most affected by the buyback. Second, firearm deaths in states with higher buyback rates per capita fell proportionately more than in states with lower buyback rates.

Are you calling them liars?

No. While we're both wrong about their primary purpose (which after looking it up on their website is education and training people in firearms use), their other purpose is (from their about page):

"as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights"

https://home.nra.org/about-the-nra/

"Downvote for lying".

Oh really? Lol.

I've produced peer reviewed research supporting my views. StukaFox produced none.

There are opposing research papers of course (it is a contentious issue). But it takes a very short sighted person to produce a limited set of ABS data (lol, 2 years) and a Snopes article to declare that I'm wrong. Keep in mind I mentioned in my first comment that there were studies on this topic.

Wow, that a fascinating statistic you pulled out of your ass.

Let's see what literally THREE FUCKING SECONDS of searching on Google produces

(search term: "Australia homicide rate")

Oh, look!

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4510.0~2016~Main%20Features~Victims%20of%20Crime,%20Australia~3

Aaaaand I quote:

"Across Australia, the number of victims of Murder decreased by 4% between 2015 and 2016, from 236 to 227 victims

A weapon was used in 69% of Murders (157 victims). A knife was twice as likely to have been recorded as the murder weapon (71 victims), when compared to a firearm (32 victims). (Table 4)"

So there was a DECREASE in the murder rate in 2017. Furthermore, of 227 murders, only -32- were from firearms, or ~14%.

Let's look at mass shootings in Aussieland.

Oh, that's right, we can't: BECAUSE THERE WERE NONE!

How about the good ol' USA where any idiot can purchase a gun?

In 2016, there were 10,182 murders by firearms. (https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/). A total of 17,250 people were reported killed in the US in 2016, with the number of murders increasing by about 8.6% in comparison to 2015. (https://qz.com/1086403/fbi-crime-statistics-us-murders-were-up-in-2016-and-chicago-had-a-lot-to-do-with-it/)

Let's see here: ~14% of the murders is your maligned Antipodes were committed with a firearm and the murder rate was down while ~60% of the murders here in the US were committed with a firearm and the murder rate is up.

What conclusions can we draw from this?

Oh, yeah, there's this as well:

https://www.snopes.com/crime/statistics/ausguns.asp

And a nb: I know you're going to howl and wail that Chicago has the most restrictive gun laws in the US and people are getting mowed down there left, right and center.

From NPR:
(https://www.npr.org/2017/10/05/555580598/fact-check-is-chicago-proof-that-gun-laws-don-t-work)

"A 2015 study of guns in Chicago, co-authored by Cook, found that more than 60 percent of new guns used in Chicago gang-related crimes and 31.6 percent used in non-gang-related crimes between 2009 and 2013 were bought in other states. Indiana was a particularly heavy supplier, providing nearly one-third of the gang guns and nearly one-fifth of the non-gang guns."

(actual study here: http://home.uchicago.edu/ludwigj/papers/JCrimLC%202015%20Guns%20in%20Chicago.pdf )

In conclusion: maybe do a little research next time, hmm?

Also, Snopes.

https://www.snopes.com/rat-showering-like-a-person/

This story dates back at least as far as WWII, I think the details change on every re-telling

https://www.snopes.com/military/lighthouse.asp

Nice try. But his wife was suppose to have also run the American Ninja Warrior course for "sensationalism". https://www.snopes.com/arthur-hickenlooper-81-american-ninjaj-warrior/

Brent Steffensen, an American Ninja Warrior competitor who is not 81 confirmed that he was the man inside the rubber mask.

Is American Ninja Warrior achieving singularity with American wrestling?