|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Fake polls, fake news | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: The problem is that you don't truly know any such thing. You see claims that suit your prejudices and you agree with them. That is possibly the biggest reason why you are so often wrong (the main competitor would be your tendancy to voice your prejudices as knee jerk reactions with no regard for the truth)
quote: Instead of resorting to conspiracy theories maybe you should consider the possibility that the reason you can't find reliable evidence is that you are wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I know I am right. Consider it from that point of view for a change and then offer advice.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ringo Member (Idle past 441 days) Posts: 20940 From: frozen wasteland Joined:
|
Faith writes:
Well, Chicken Little... you can wait for the sky to fall.
I know what I'm posting is the truth, what can I possibly do to convince anyone else?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Faith writes: I know I am right. Okay, then stop looking at YouTube videos. Instead, use the internet to find the State websites in Europe. Look at the statistics the people actually there are posting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17828 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
In what way should I consider it that I haven't already ?
It is a fact that you often claim that falsehoods are true. It is a fact that you don't have the evidence that would justify a claim to knowledge. It is a fact that your claim to have better judgment than the rest of us is a laughable joke.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I guess it's hopeless. Political correctness rules. Nobody here wants to believe the truth about what's going on in Europe. Deep grief. Your problem is that you know the truth without needing any objective evidence. If somebody says it in a way you find convincing, you believe it. I won't speculate here on why that might be, but many people don't have your reasons to believe what you believe. Understandably they want evidence. If that is the state of affairs that constitutes "PC" then you haven't described a problem at all. Evidence based reasoning is the rational way to behave. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
For example, when I heard in the mainstream news that Trump passed an executive order to ban muslims I was shocked. So I went to the executive order, itself, and read it. It was temporary and didn't mention the word "muslim" once. "Muslim ban", pssh, what a load of bullshit. You believe a Muslim ban must mention the word Muslim? Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Aussie Member Posts: 275 From: FL USA Joined:
|
You're the batshit crazy one... You're so sexy when you swear, Faith. Edited by Aussie, : No reason given."...heck is a small price to pay for the truth"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined:
|
Jar on the real threat to democracy:
It's not Islamic Militants. It's not Communists. It's not illegal immigrants. It's not Roman Catholicism. It's not liberals. It's Donald Trump according to a former Navy Seal, a retired four-star Admiral William McRaven. The battlelines are only too clearly drawn these days.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 423 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Thank you Faith. Yes, I hope the lines are becoming clearer though there is still much that is simply wrong.
The CPAC at least acknowledges that Alt-Right is Fascist even though they are still ignorant that it is another Conservative Fascist group.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1473 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
I'm afraid you're in for a terrible shock.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 197 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
I know I am right. Consider it from that point of view for a change and then offer advice.
Admit you are a fallible mortal who could be wrong. Or are you claiming infallibility? Again? Edited by JonF, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined:
|
I know what I'm posting is the truth How? You posted one video that said essentially that 'The numbers don't exist but we know Sweden's 'rape problem' is due to immigration because foreign right-wing newspapers like the Daily Caller and the Daily Mail report rapes weekly - and even though there are tens of thousands of rapes - and only 52 weeks in a year - we know this accounts for a rise in the order of tens or hundreds of thousands of rapes'. That doesn't seem like sound reasoning to me.
Nobody here wants to believe the truth about what's going on in Europe. I live there, in a Muslim dense area. Are you suggesting what you are reading in biased American news media trumps the life I am living?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22504 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
New Cat's Eye writes: When Trump called the New York Times, CNN, ABC, NBC and CBS fake news in his tweet, I think he was talking more like I am than the wiki-definition. Yes, I've said this several times, that Trump is using the term incorrectly. When Trump says "fake news" he means news that isn't favorable to him, like news about his Russian ties or his wall. Sometimes by "fake news" he means news that was leaked, like his phone conversations with foreign heads of state. He definitely doesn't mean "demonstrably false" news (Faith's definition of "fake news"), or if he does then he's demonstrably wrong.
So you can't expect me to use the wiki-definition to provide examples of what I think Trump was talking about. If that's just off the table, then that's fine too. I think it's fine to talk about what Trump is referring to when he says "fake news," as long as it is well understood that he's using the term incorrectly. For example, if we were to discuss Trump's phone call to the prime minister of Australia, reports of which Trump labels "fake news," it must be understood that it isn't "fake news" at all, and that the media that reported it was not concocting "fake news" but was reporting news truly and accurately.
On the other hand, passing off partisan opinions that spin the truth so far that it's barely recognizable is something that we do have a problem with. A link or two to examples?
For example, when I heard in the mainstream news that Trump passed an executive order to ban muslims I was shocked. So I went to the executive order, itself, and read it. It was temporary and didn't mention the word "muslim" once. "Muslim ban", pssh, what a load of bullshit. If it's bullshit then why did the Ninth Circuit rule that the order was targeting Muslims? Courts know better than to blindly accept an order's overtly stated purpose.
I'm going from memeory here, and honeslty I'd have to look into it more before I came to a conclusion, but when I saw Trump calling CNN fake news I didn't see that being because they reported on the existence of the dossier, but instead what they said about it. I'm not sure though, I'll have to look further. There were a couple stories. When Trump held his first press conference back in January and called CNN "fake news" I believe there was just the one report (this one) that both Trump and Obama had been briefed on the existence of a dossier. Later, in February there was a second report (this one) that investigators had corroborated some of the information in the dossier. If you don't read the mainstream press, not even Fox News, there seems no way to know what reports Trump is talking about when he accuses them of "fake news." Seems like quite a handicap.
Did it ban muslims? Did it ban muslims? No, it didn't. You were much more accurate when you said that the executive order didn't mention Muslims, because it definitely had the result of banning Muslims. There were actual real Muslims stuck at airports (a hundred or two) and many more stuck in limbo at various stages of being in transit.
Sounds fascinating, but how does this work in practice to go through to their sources? Court cases, and laws, and executive orders are available online outside of news sources. Those sources cover hardly any news at all. Where do you go to find out about, say, ISIS in Mosul or the progress of Brexit or whether that transgender teen plans to continue his appeal to the Supreme Court? Do you really have non-news-media links to accurate information about these things - and most news, really.
For example, concerning the story about the DeVos/Sessions disagreement, what does going to the source entail? There isn't always a source. And those are the cases where your reading hearsay. Why cloud your judgement with such drivel? Except that it isn't drivel. Do you even know what they were disagreeing about? In any case, it's extremely relevant. It truly helps to understand what side of today's executive order each is on. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1434 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
Formal definitions seem to function to obscure the truth. ... The purpose is to ensure people are talking about the same thing, that would seem to me to lift some of the veils hiding whatever truth there is.
... I know what I'm posting is the truth, ... How? What paradigm do you use to verify what you are posting?
... what can I possibly do to convince anyone else? ... Show us the logic and the evidence, using verifiable sources.
... I don't know, how does one prove something is going on across the world that is denied by major sources of information? ... If it is happening you can find it from other sources, hopefully several different ones (and if the wording is identical they are not independent sources) Take the #NoDAPL protests for instance: rarely reported on the MSM (unless there was a report on violence committed by the protesters ... which did not happen, or unless there was some added element that was considered "newsworthy" by the editors ... like the veterans arriving in large numbers to join the protests). This protest was going on for over a year, but you wouldn't know it from watching MSM (or Faux). But you could find it on Democracy Now and you could find it on live feeds from the Green Party (when Jill Stein visited), and you could find it on live feed from people in the camp. So #NoDAPL is not fake news. Then we look at the "Bowling Green Massacre" where the only "evidence" is a claim by Kellyanne Conway. There is not police report or any other record of a terrorist attack. The closest is a report of two (2) men picked up with weapons. So "Bowling Green Massacre" IS fake news. Or the night of the "Swedish Meatball Massacre" where not only is there no evidence to support Trumps claim but the Swedish government issued several statements that showed that the claim was fabricated:
quote: So the "Swedish Meatball Massacre"is fake news.
... There are lots of people telling the truth but you all refuse to believe it. ... People telling stories are not news based on evidence, Show us the logic and the evidence, using verifiable sources.
... Political correctness rules. ... Or reality.
... Nobody here wants to believe the truth about what's going on in Europe. Deep grief. Nobody wants to believe overblown reports that try to drum up causes for launching a war. Enjoy by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024