The Biden Presidency

I think they are. Am I simply deluded by propaganda? Percy thinks every YouTube video is worthless, but Im not convinced.

That sure looks like a good diagnosis.

Yes, that's all there is to it, but you don't have to take my word for it. There are a great many legitimate and free news outlets available on the web. Stop watching YouTube.I recently had a brief conversation about the Internet with a young person, maybe 26 or so, who said he got his news from WhatsApp. Social media like Twitter and WhatsApp and so forth are poor sources of news because you only see the articles people link to. Most people follow friends or people they agree with, and so they're most likely to be pointed at articles that are more opinion than news and that only reinforce what they already believe. Most people immerse themselves in an echo chamber of opinions they already share.If you want actual news then read a newspaper (the news section, not the opinion section) with a good journalistic reputation. You want reliable new sources that have developed strong journalistic traditions over decades. Such traditions don't just pop up overnight at social media sites or influencer accounts.Only after you know what actually happened does it make sense to access other sources of information. Some are based on what actually happened, some less so, some very much less so, and some not at all. If you're getting your "facts" from bad sources then there's a good chance you're not getting real facts. That you are a font of false facts is because you grant credibility to sources that have done nothing to earn it and everything to question it. If this is about the long run of large annual deficits then probably most of us agree that we should try to reduce the annual deficit.If this is about fiat money again, something you've criticized often, then you should probably take it to a more appropriate thread.--Percy

That's it? That's your whole rebuttal? Diomedes writes over a hundred words of explanation and that's all you have to say in reply? What is wrong with you? How is anyone to have an intelligent dialogue with you if you're entire response boils down to, "Nope!" You keep asking this question in various forms, and everyone always answers yes. What is it going to take to convince you that you are a helpless rube for certain types of misinformation? Percy does not think that every YouTube video is worthless.What I know is that you are full of misinformation and that your preferred information source is YouTube. You have a proclivity for granting credibility to YouTube sources that not only haven't earned it but certainly don't deserve it.There are a number of reliable and free news source out there. All the major networks have news sites, then there's the Guardian, Axios, the Associated Press and Politico off the top of my head. It wouldn't hurt you to spend some time at Snopes, either.--Percy

As someone who has worked in the software industry for almost 30 years, let me provide you with some insights that I think may help.Throughout history, there have been numerous individuals who will often make grandiose claims about the nature of society, indicating that 'the end is near'. They will provide rudimentary 'evidence' for those claims and leverage it to further their agenda. This is not a new phenomenon.What the internet along with video sharing platforms and social media sites have allowed is for those individuals to get a much larger audience than they have had in the past. But the core aspect of how they operate is still the same: make claims that selectively pick data to confirm the claim and make that information available to the masses.But here is the reason why it can seem more pervasive and give the impression that problems are more serious than they actually are: and that is how the algorithms that are serving you information are designed.Whether it be youtube, twitter, facebook, etc. All these platforms utilize algorithms to gauge your areas of interest and then serve you additional information regarding those interests. So if you have an interest in classic cars, you will get fed news articles, videos and social media posts that align with those interests. That is done deliberately as it maximizes your viewing and clicks, which is how the revenue is generated.Unfortunately, this is where the problems arise. If you start going down the rabbit hole of looking into things such as Amercian debt, fiat currencies, the gold standard, etc, the algorithms will then continue to serve up additional articles and videos that align with those interests. What this does is give the impression that there are serious issues in those areas due to the sheer volume of data you are getting. But in the end, its just the same information being regurgitated from different individuals and mediums. What the algorithms are essentially doing is playing into something called 'confirmation bias'. Whereby if you already have made up your mind about something or are leaning in that direction, you will be continually served up information that corroborates those claims, even if most of them don't hold water.In conclusion, the way you snap yourself out of that cycle is to start performing searches that counter your previous searches. And you will find numerous articles and videos stipulating the exact opposite of what the previous articles/videos might have been stating. The most important thing to recognize is the sources: if you are seeing videos from individuals with little to no background in the areas they are discussing, they probably aren't good sources of truth. If you instead find counter arguments from more reputable sources (universities, legitimate government agencies, scholars, etc) then you are more likely now getting a more accurate representation of things.

That search can also include critiques of the videos that he's been watching.For instance, a number of videos by Erika "Gutsick Gibbon" and by Aron Ra and by others ("et alia") critique creationist videos and books (eg, Erika v. "Bones of Contention" -- one of Erika's favorite moves is to refer to the scientific paper referenced by the creationist only to find that they not only had read no more than the abstract, but they only read the very beginning, which is a statement of the problem being addressed, and leave out the rest which says that that problem was solved and how it was solved). And Phat should already be familiar with Mr. Deity's replies to videos from "Prager University" ("My old alma mater ... Go Devils!").So if there's a video that Phat thinks was persuasive, he should immediately search for responses to that video. Just as I have for decades recommended to creationists repeating PRATTs that they also read the refutations for those PRATTs (though in vain).

Actually, that makes a lot of sense. Thanks for taking the time to give me some positive feedback.Now that I think of it, that explains a lot of my YouTube interactions. I DO suffer from confirmation bias, and like many literalist believers, tie it all into what I've been led fed to believe anyway. I suppose, upon reflection, that it is wise to be skeptical...even of the beliefs and confirmed biases which I already hold.My essential battle around here is basically being told to utilize critical thinking, throw away prior assumptions and beliefs, and look at life from other angles and perspectives.Something in me resists that. I have always believed in Jesus and have resisted "throwing Him away" as jar used to coach me to do and which many here at EvC easily did do.Perhaps, if I were my own counselor and critic, I would ask myself why I am prone to believe that things are getting worse. Your algorithmic explanation is one answer.

OK, fair enough. But do you think that Dennis Prager spreads false information? Or is it simply a counter-perspective to progressive thinking?And to me, Mr. Deity is humorous at best, and inexperienced at worst. After all, how could a Mormon even know Jesus to begin with??? I'm being serious!Not to suggest that only Calvary Chapel cohorts have an inside track on God's one and only Son. If Jesus is real, however (which I firmly believe that He is) we need to ask ourselves how He would ever reach a skeptic such as yourself who tossed the Bible aside years ago.We already know that the peanut gallery suffers from anti-conservative bias, which is perfectly fine.The problem is that the enemy (that sneaky spirit that God allowed to exist in order to temper us) has also convinced you that Christianity itself is problematic.I think sometimes that secular humanist critical thinkers conflate conservatism with Christianity and throw the Holy Baby out with the MAGAT bathwater.In your case, we both can agree that Trump is a potential antichrist candidate.

Yes. Many times YES. I haven't been telling you to "throw away Jesus". Believe what you want about that. But at least try to be more skeptical of what people tell you about finance, government policy, politics and all that.Note that jar still calls himself a Christian. Maybe you are reading too much into his "throw Jesus away". Maybe he is just saying that you should learn to be more self-reliant and less gullible.

People are not suggesting that you throw away your current views. That would be the same as what you already do, blindly following someone else's advice. What people are actually suggesting is that you apply critical thinking to your current views by gathering reliable information and analyzing how well your views accord with it. You consistently mischaracterize what people say. I never said or even implied that "every YouTube video is worthless", and jar never urged you to throw Jesus away. If we want you to throw away anything it's your uncritical reliance on bogus and suspect information sources. Your whole approach to life is, "Choose who to trust and then follow their guidance." What you should instead do is listen to information and ideas and then think for yourself.--Percy

That really shouldn't be a battle. It should be something we all strive towards. Using critical thinking not only reduces the likelihood that you will fall victim to confirmation bias, but it also allows you to be open to new ideas and new perspectives. Which is a good thing. I myself am not religious. However, I can provide an analogy for you by referencing my mother.FYI, my mother has a PhD in biochemistry and she was a university professor for many years. Yet concurrently, my mother is religious. She still frequents churches and follows many traditions. The way she reconciles facts with her faith is she has a demarcation between them.
Objective science focuses on the "how". How does it work. What makes it tick. Etc.
Subjective religion focuses on the "why". Why are we here? What is the purpose in life? Etc. One is more technical while the other is more philosophical.Ultimately, the key is to not attempt to conflate literalist interpretations, especially from the Bible, when trying to draw conclusions. My mother often states that the Bible for her has always been little more than a moral guide. She recognizes that it is just a collection of works written several thousands of years ago by men who had limited understanding of the nature of things. One can argue about morality aspects of the Bible; that is certain. But fundamentally, it isn't a science textbook. At the time it was written, we were in the early iron age, long before the advent of the scientific method.

Brian Dalton: That's MISTER Deity to You! I can't hate on Brian Dalton! He seems quite nice. I disagree with his defense of atheism, but why wouldn't I?

Really?
Rule 5.
Is it really that hard to follow forum rules?
If you can't follow basic rules, why do you even bother posting here?ABE
Off-topic too!

I don't want you to throw out your beliefs about Jesus. But the devil (we'll get back to him) quotes scripture, yes? Your faith is used cynically by hucksters and demagogues to suborn your reason.If Jesus returned to drive out the money changers, how many churches would stand empty?What Christian nationalists want now is not religious freedom but an oppressive religious liberty -- so that faith becomes a Get Out of the Law card that permits every harm done to others in the name of God. They are actually religious libertines. How does that differ from the Taliban? O ye of little faith! According to the Bible, Jesus can meet that challenge. Ask Paul the next time you walk the road to Damascus. You don't need to knock him down yourself.
​ No bias is "perfectly fine." Hard-learned, well-evidenced skepticism is not bias.
​ Always with the literal demonization: to disagree with a Christian is to be in league with the devil. Thumbing through the New Testament, I failed to find Jesus' charge to scourge demons from the unconverted: possessed pigs, yes; Samaritans, not so much.Maybe you can help.
​ If you'd pull your head out of the hateful YouTube echo chambers, maybe you could hear Jesus more clearly. I don't think it's humanists conflating political views with religious ones to the detriment of both.That would be you.
​

I had the opportunity to meet with and speak with Senator Baldwin yesterday. As always very impressed with her. As we talked about, if a CPAP is all the GQP has on President Biden then there is nothing. The battle will still be tough, but the GOP has no real substance.