Sorry if any of this has been posted already.
Snopes is a husband and wife outfit run by a couple of Jews.
They're far-left and specialize in apologetic "debunks" of anything which makes non-Whites look bad.
A memorable example of this (aside from the recent Gex 'debunk') is their putative refutation of the Chinese baby-eating artist Zhu Yu.
Snopes stated that he did not infact use real babies to make his soup but that rather, the photographs showed a "Duck's head on a toy doll's body". No evidence whatsoever was provided for this and yet the article was used to really take the steam out of the spreading red pill.
Snopes use a very manipulative psychological tactic of ambiguity to avoid being held accountable, they write suggestively then leave it up to the reader to fill in the blanks.
In the case of Yu, they stated that his demonstration was "art", from which the reader is meant to make the unfounded leap to "art is never real." This is what most people did.
There is actually no controversy regarding the fact that Zhu Yu used read aborted babies. He admitted it in interviews and explained how it was possible to exploit "the space between what is legal and what is moral" (paraphrasing there.) In other words, his art exceeded the bounds of propriety but not so much as to enter the territory of illegality. Pretty interesting.
Anyway, I digress. As someone who was trying to spread the truth about Yu and "eating people" back around c.2004, only to be met with citation after citation leading to snopes, I took it upon myself to uncover the truth. FYI, I almost got banned from Stormfront for it. Stormfront routinely adopts a similar attitude of protectionism towards non-whites, for PR purposes.
The main objection is simply that "it can't be real". Normies, even right-wing normies, are so shielded from the less pleasant aspects of reality, that behaviours we have probably all witnessed, tortures, cannibalism, sexual depravity of the most extreme kind, they fall outside of the normie Overton Window and are therefore subject to an argument from incredulity.
Finally, around last year sometimes, I started posting a debunk of Snopes article on Zhu Yu, contrasting the artist's own statements of fact with the Snopes unfounded claims about a "doll's head". The article, which had remained unaltered for years, was then edited by snopes to hide their deceit.
>original version with "Doll's head" claim
https://archive.is/Pwpo4
>latest version, revised to hide unskeptical speculation.
http://www.snopes.com/horrors/cannibal/fetus.asp
(looks like they reinserted the 'doll's head' thing, probably because the cover-up was revealed a few months ago)
I wanted to link the proof but look at this: SNOPES HAVE HAD THE PAGE EXCLUDED FROM WAYBACK MACHINE,.