I was surprised to read Vox Day's comments about rumors that the Spongebob Squarepants children's TV character may have pedophile influences in his background. It looks like the address on Spongebob's driver's license is located on Little Saint James Island in the American Virgin Islands - the island formerly owned by the infamous sexual predator, Jeffrey Epstein.
I highly recommend clicking over to Vox's blog post and reading it for yourself, then verifying it via Google Maps. It checks out - at least, it did for me, five minutes ago.
Vox advises:
At this point, all children’s shows need to be considered intrinsically suspect. Just as all media “fact-checks” need to be considered inherently false.
True dat.
Peter
I am surprised that VOX did that. I thought that VOX was far Leftist. May be someone who has pedophilic tendencies that works at Google stuck that into the Google Earth/Google Maps database.
ReplyDeleteDa fuq? Leftist?
DeleteHave you READ anything he has written?
He's confusing vox.com with vox day.
DeleteInteresting...
ReplyDeletePlease dont keep blindly sharing these nonsense Facebook rageclick posts without checking.
ReplyDeleteSnopes clearly debunks this. If you can be critical of mass media narrative then plese use the same criticality on anything that sounds like straight up QAnon storm nonsense.
Though a Google Maps search for “little st james theme park address,” as seen in the posts, does not currently yield a result for SpongeBob’s fictional address on Epstein’s island, it may well have in the past. As explained here on the Help Center page for Google Maps, anyone can “publicly add places, like a business or landmark, to the map” by searching for an address and clicking on the “Add a missing place” option. It is likely that someone did this for “124 Conch Street.”
@BillB: Vox Day is not the same as Vox, the online magazine.
ReplyDelete@Anonymous at 2:10PM: This wasn't a "nonsense Facebook rageclick post" - it was a blog post. Furthermore, it can be verified by yourself, or anyone else, by searching Google Maps for "124 Conch Str Bikini Bottom". My search results are at:
https://www.google.com/maps/search/124+conch+str+bikini+bottom/@18.3175191,-64.8990515,13z/data=!3m1!4b1?entry=ttu
So, you see, it matters not whether Snopes (hardly a trustworthy source) or anyone else "debunks" this. Its truth can be proven by a simple search. Why didn't you do that? It makes you out to be rather less than interested in the truth.
I like vox, but this is a questionable one. As the guy you're implying is a goodie said "anyone can “publicly add places, like a business or landmark, to the map” by searching for an address and clicking on the “Add a missing place” option. It is likely that someone did this for “124 Conch Street.”"
DeleteIn other words, there's a perfectly reasonable explanation for that address showing up there on Google Earth. A prankster)bored person. St. James Island's location has been known for years. If *you* were "seriously interested in the truth" you might consider investigating how long that address had shown up as a result on Google Earth. Or perhaps whether such a place actually existed on the island, or could only be found on Google's publicly editable software/website? Vox does great work for the Lord, but this is pure nonsense. SpongeBob has other issues. A fictional address, appended to an empty lot, with the only proof that the address actually exists being an inverted website? Not one of the issues with SpongeBob. God bless.
Why is a “perfectly reasonable explanation” considered capable of debunking a claim? A claim is made, and critics respond that there is a possible explanation without ever showing that it is the actual explanation. Why is it on the original claimant to disprove the possible explanation, rather than the critic to prove the possible explanation? I’ve been seeing this in politicized science debates for over a decade, and it is a logical fallacy called affirming the consequent. If I ate thanksgiving dinner I would feel very full. I feel very full therefore it is fact that I just ate thanksgiving dinner. No, what about alternatives? Responding that it MAY have been Easter dinner does not disprove that it really was thanksgiving dinner.
DeleteAt this point, if Vox Day said the sky is blue, I'd look out the window and check. He's a liar, and IDGAF what he thinks. I find SpongeBob annoying, but there was damned sure no pedophilia advocacy in the show.
ReplyDelete"Somebody knows somethin'"
ReplyDeleteI remember reading an article way back in the 1980s where a writer for children's cartoons was bragging about how much easier it was for them to slip inappropriate things into the scripts for cartoons than it was for movies.
ReplyDeleteTo Peter,,”It makes you out to be rather less than interested in the truth.”Indeed Siri. Indeed.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous at 2:10 PM is most likely correct. Not a hill worth dying on. Of the two locations that show up, only one has the address - it is a location called "Ledges of St James" which is listed as a housing complex and it points to an empty spot on St Thomas, which miraculously has nothing but one photo geolocated to that specific spot. Interestingly this is a photo from a cruise ship, posted by a guy named Nick Bauman in 2016. The fact that a photo appears in the middle of St Thomas completely not related to the specific spot with the said address indicates we had someone who was bored to death.
ReplyDeleteAnd then for the other location you have Little St James which does not list any address and is there most likely by some association. Perhaps with a previous trick of the same kind or simply b/c of google searches.
wojtek
I just ran the same test and got the same result.
ReplyDeleteThat makes us better than a big chunk of the 'science' community
Funny how a whole bunch of people seem to want this to go away.
ReplyDeleteLook I get it everything is screwed right now and I mean EVERYTHING. But I am not going to get worked up over someone’s interpretation of a CARTOON
ReplyDeleteI just tested the address alone (everything before before the @ sign) and it failed to resolve to any islands, the closest was in South Carolina. Note that I did NOT include the Lat/Long string after the @ that forced the answer out to the Virgin Islands.
ReplyDeleteI've watched the show and there is a lot of adult-level humor slipped in so the parents watching with their kids don't go crazy. Same thing with EVERY cartoon show.
My money is on someone having some quiet fun with Google Maps data. Still, the question is who that person is and are there others who will know to interpret it as a signal when they see it. Interesting to say the least.
ReplyDeleteOk, come on. Have you watched Spongebob? It's a well known inside joke that Bikini Bottom is the ocean floor under Bikini Atoll, where we did all the underwater nuke testing. The radiation is responsible for all the sea creatures gaining intelligence, walking and talking, etc. Kinda like the origins of Godzilla, but for children.
ReplyDeleteThe series premiered in 1999. The episode where the license was aired was 2007 according to IMDB. Epstein didn't really become a big news item until almost a decade later.
This is a manufactured outrage click and post BS that is supposed to make conservatives look dumb. Don't fall for it.
MK's right. Vox is a self-absorbed fag.
ReplyDeleteAnd using Snopes to fact check anything? Bwahahahaha. Talk about a leftist info site.
ReplyDeleteHold on a sec. Just check dates. Epstein only bought the island in 1998. SpongeBob premiered in 1999, a 7 min pilot pitched to Nickelodeon in 1997.
ReplyDelete"After buying the 72-acre body of land, Epstein outfitted the island with towering palm trees, multiple buildings, and a helicopter pad, Bloomberg reports."
So how does that timeline work? Epstein bought the island, got it outfitted with a road in one year to fly the creator of a Nickelodeon show there to party in time for the show to be made and go to air with a reference to that road just built on the island? Seriously?
And then what? I'll need to see more evidence that there is anything more in SpongeBob (other than being stupid) as propaganda on children.
That particular issue appears false to me. However, if you notice, there are famous 'crabcakes' being sold at a 'Bikini bottom'. So, more like puerile humor which has been in a huge number of cartoons. Sort of like an episode of PowerPuff Girls, where they explain to their friend how they were created. The friend responds, "Mom says I was an accident, too."
ReplyDelete