Discussion History Main / TheBermudaTriangle

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I have checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described, anyway.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not a word is explicitly said about any of this happening in RealLife, nor does it appear that there is as great a need for explicitly mentioning that it\\\'s a myth as was suggested.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself? This page exists to outline a trope--not to discredit an obvious UrbanLegend, no matter how false it is.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described, anyway.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not a word is explicitly said about any of this happening in RealLife, nor does it appear that there is as great a need for explicitly mentioning that it\\\'s a myth as was suggested.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself? This page exists to outline a trope--not to discredit an obvious UrbanLegend, no matter how false it is.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described, anyway.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not a word is explicitly said about any of this happening in RealLife, nor does it appear that there is as great a need for explicitly mentioning that it\\\'s a myth as was suggested.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself? This page exists to outline a trope--not to discredit an UrbanLegend, no matter how false it is.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described, anyway.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not a word is explicitly said about any of this happening in RealLife, nor does it appear that there is as great a need for explicitly mentioning that it\\\'s a myth as was suggested.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology. What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself?

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described, anyway.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology. What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself?

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--nearly all of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology. What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself?

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--most of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology. What\\\'s the actual harm in somebody suggesting it\\\'s real, anyway? Is that actually \\\'\\\'damaging\\\'\\\' enough to the wiki for people to be concerned in and of itself?

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find untrue and lacking proof[[hottip:*: I \\\'\\\'have\\\'\\\' checked the wicks--most of which I\\\'ve placed around the Wiki myself and show no signs of the \\\"misuse\\\" described.]]. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause; the article is also noted to have also been the first to map out the Triangle region.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the alleged UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the claimed UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere else and profess belief in whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the claimed UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere and believe whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoShotJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the claimed UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof. The description itself is perfectly clear that information about the Triangle is \\\"according to fiction and UrbanLegend\\\" and not word is given about RealLife.

Ultimately, no matter what we put in the description, people can still go on anywhere and believe whatever outlandish garbage they want, be it [[BermudaTriangle this]], WhoKilledJFK, 9/11 being an inside job, or Scientology.

TheOtherWiki dates the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bermuda_Triangle#Origins origins]] of the Bermuda Triangle legend over twenty years earlier than the claimed UrExample from 1974. George X. Sand\\\'s article \\\"Sea Mystery At Our Back Door\\\" from \\\'\\\'[[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fate_%28magazine%29 Fate]]\\\'\\\' magazine was first published in 1952 and is widely believed to be the first time anyone suggested that disappearances in the Triangle had a paranormal cause.

The misuse claim, as it currently stands, I find outlandish and without proof.