ax1
Legend
And now a white supremacist is taking power in February and he cheers on with his other half who is ashamed to call herself Indian.
Donald Trump running for president
- Thread starter LiftWithDonuts
- Start date
And now a white supremacist is taking power in February and he cheers on with his other half who is ashamed to call herself Indian.
ax1
Legend
I have him bookmarked Ill try to check him out soon.
These days I rarely listed to a live show, I love finding podcasts and then skimming through them faster in higher speed and skipping topics I care less about. Im willing to bet he has a podcast of his radio stream, not sure but alot of people do that.
Ricky10
Well-known member
No kidding! It was hard for me to leave the house today, still driving past BLM and Biden-Harris signs, people jogging on side streets wearing masks even though they were alone. It was really depressing and it feels like I am living in a bad dream. I have a very unsettled and uncomfortable feeling. Wearing a mask now makes me feel like a pawn of Biden and China, whereas before I just did it without any negative thoughts.
Last edited:
ax1
Legend
Fortunatly the website is still up to Invalid Link Removed
Sorry folks Im back on my 9/11 binge, cant let it go
Invalid Link Removed
Explosions | World Trade Center Building 7
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claims in its WTC 7 FAQs that “no blast sounds were heard on audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.” 1 However, both audio recordings and eyewitness accounts of explosions during the destruction of WTC 7 contradict NIST’s claim.
Although there are not nearly as many eyewitness accounts of explosions in WTC 7 as in WTC 1 and WTC 2, there are a handful of accounts that strongly suggest explosions occurred immediately before and during WTC 7’s destruction. These include:
Invalid Link Removed
MSNBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield hears a loud sound from several blocks north of WTC 7 and says, “Oh my god.... This is it.”
These eyewitness accounts are corroborated by MSNBC video footage of reporter Ashleigh Banfield several blocks north of WTC 7. In the video, she hears a loud sound, turns her attention to WTC 7, and says, “Oh my god.... This is it.” 5 About seven seconds after she hears the loud sound, WTC 7 collapses. As David Chandler observes in the video Invalid Link Removed:
“There were two blasts, followed by seven more regularly spaced all in two and a half seconds. Craig Bartmer’s testimony may come to mind: ‘The whole time you’re hearing “thume, thume, thume, thume, thume.”’....
“When we hear the sharp, regular series of sounds in the background, the building has not yet started to fall. When we hear the reporter say, “This is it,” the building has not yet started to fall.... The blasts we heard occurred seconds before the building started to fall.”
In addition to eyewitness accounts of explosions at the time of WTC 7’s destruction, there were eye-witness accounts from two men — Michael Hess (Corporation Counsel for the City of New York) and Barry Jennings (Deputy Director of Emergency Services at the New York City Housing Authority) — who reported experiencing an explosion and smoke in a stairway in the northeast part of WTC 7 prior to the collapse of WTC 1 at 10:28 AM.6
It has been claimed that what Hess and Jennings experienced was the result of debris from WTC 1 impacting WTC 7. However, this claim is not plausible, as Hess and Jennings were in a stairway at the opposite end of WTC 7 (northeast) from where debris impacted the building (southwest), and their account indicates that the explosion and smoke they witnessed occurred before the collapse of WTC 1.7
Endnotes
[1] NIST: Invalid Link Removed, Question #13.
[2] Invalid Link Removed
[3] Invalid Link Removed
[4] Invalid Link Removed
[5] Invalid Link Removed
[6] Hess: Invalid Link Removed; Jennings: Invalid Link Removed
[7] Griffin, David Ray: The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7 (2009), pp. 84-111.
Sorry folks Im back on my 9/11 binge, cant let it go
Invalid Link Removed
Explosions | World Trade Center Building 7
The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) claims in its WTC 7 FAQs that “no blast sounds were heard on audio tracks of video recordings during the collapse of WTC 7 or reported by witnesses.” 1 However, both audio recordings and eyewitness accounts of explosions during the destruction of WTC 7 contradict NIST’s claim.
Although there are not nearly as many eyewitness accounts of explosions in WTC 7 as in WTC 1 and WTC 2, there are a handful of accounts that strongly suggest explosions occurred immediately before and during WTC 7’s destruction. These include:
- Craig Bartmer, former NYPD officer: “[A]ll of a sudden...I looked up, and... [t]he thing started peeling in on itself.... I started running...and the whole time you’re hearing “thume, thume, thume, thume, thume.” I think I know an explosion when I hear it.” 2
- First-year NYU medical student identified as Darryl: “[W]e heard this sound that sounded like a clap of thunder.... [T]urned around — we were shocked.... t looked like there was a shockwave ripping through the building and the windows all busted out.... [A]bout a second later the bottom floor caved out and the building followed after that.” 3
[*]
[*]Kevin McPadden, unaffiliated, volunteer first responder: “And then it was like another two, three seconds, you heard explosions. Like BA-BOOOOOM! And it’s like a distinct sound...BA-BOOOOOM! And you felt a rumble in the ground, like, almost like you wanted to grab onto something.” 4
Invalid Link Removed
MSNBC reporter Ashleigh Banfield hears a loud sound from several blocks north of WTC 7 and says, “Oh my god.... This is it.”
These eyewitness accounts are corroborated by MSNBC video footage of reporter Ashleigh Banfield several blocks north of WTC 7. In the video, she hears a loud sound, turns her attention to WTC 7, and says, “Oh my god.... This is it.” 5 About seven seconds after she hears the loud sound, WTC 7 collapses. As David Chandler observes in the video Invalid Link Removed:
“There were two blasts, followed by seven more regularly spaced all in two and a half seconds. Craig Bartmer’s testimony may come to mind: ‘The whole time you’re hearing “thume, thume, thume, thume, thume.”’....
“When we hear the sharp, regular series of sounds in the background, the building has not yet started to fall. When we hear the reporter say, “This is it,” the building has not yet started to fall.... The blasts we heard occurred seconds before the building started to fall.”
In addition to eyewitness accounts of explosions at the time of WTC 7’s destruction, there were eye-witness accounts from two men — Michael Hess (Corporation Counsel for the City of New York) and Barry Jennings (Deputy Director of Emergency Services at the New York City Housing Authority) — who reported experiencing an explosion and smoke in a stairway in the northeast part of WTC 7 prior to the collapse of WTC 1 at 10:28 AM.6
It has been claimed that what Hess and Jennings experienced was the result of debris from WTC 1 impacting WTC 7. However, this claim is not plausible, as Hess and Jennings were in a stairway at the opposite end of WTC 7 (northeast) from where debris impacted the building (southwest), and their account indicates that the explosion and smoke they witnessed occurred before the collapse of WTC 1.7
Endnotes
[1] NIST: Invalid Link Removed, Question #13.
[2] Invalid Link Removed
[3] Invalid Link Removed
[4] Invalid Link Removed
[5] Invalid Link Removed
[6] Hess: Invalid Link Removed; Jennings: Invalid Link Removed
[7] Griffin, David Ray: The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7 (2009), pp. 84-111.
ax1
Legend
Im going to check it out thanks!!!!....it such as shame in China I directly witnessed Google's algorithm experiment in almost full fruition back in the late 2000's before they were kicked out of the Country and now incremental being implemented in what is supposed to be the land of the free.
ax1
Legend
WOW!!!!!!! Yahoo is giving me alot of results Im looking for on youtube's platform. Its amazing if you want uncensored results you need to go to yahoo to find things on youtube, LOL Hopefully Ill have more luck with it, although some things may have been permanently deleted.
New bookmark!
ax1
Legend
Because of 9/11 they said they came here because they hate our freedom, so in return, people like Groper Joe became the architects of the Patriot Act....because I guess if Groper Joe strips our freedoms away, there would be nothing left for the terrorists to take!!!
What many of you dont know is Groper is the founding father of one of the most anti-Constitutional bills since the creation of the Republic.
Not only did Groper sign the Patriot act in 2001, he actually architected in 1994 after shadow government failed to completely blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.
And the sheep cheer on that Groper will take Dump's throne!! WAKE UP!!!!
Nobody active in government today has stripped more freedoms and liberties away of not just minorities but every American coast to coast than Groper Joe!
What many of you dont know is Groper is the founding father of one of the most anti-Constitutional bills since the creation of the Republic.
Not only did Groper sign the Patriot act in 2001, he actually architected in 1994 after shadow government failed to completely blow up the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building.
And the sheep cheer on that Groper will take Dump's throne!! WAKE UP!!!!
Nobody active in government today has stripped more freedoms and liberties away of not just minorities but every American coast to coast than Groper Joe!
Last edited:
Jiigzz
Legend
The same guy who won a lawsuit because "no-one takes him seriously?"
Ricky10
Well-known member
Jiigzz
Legend
Fake news!
They never called it in the first place. For people who dont trust the media, you sure do trust the fake news mill a bit too much.
Ricky10
Well-known member
So when/if evidence of widespread voting fraud officially surfaces, and the numbers turn out to not be enough to swing the election, shouldn’t the candidate be disqualified regardless? Affer all, voter fraud is illegal. Why would people want someone in the white house who participated in cheating the system to get there?
I know, I am giving a little too much credit toward those who voted for Biden-Harris, but still!
I know, I am giving a little too much credit toward those who voted for Biden-Harris, but still!
ax1
Legend
I truly dont believe any of the 74 million people (well, supposedly, lol) really give a crap. Until a couple years from now when these youngsters find out how pathetic of a snake Groper is and start getting other ideas.
ax1
Legend
Why even bother with the election when we have something else we can get him for.
Groper has been calling foreign leaders about his agenda.
That is a clear violation of the Logal Act, that alone should have him arrested for violating Federal crimes. I mean he has a whole book of crimes that should have him in jail, but at least this one is active and ongoing, lol
Invalid Link Removed
Jiigzz
Legend
At the end of the day, Biden is ahead in the popular vote and the electoral college.
Why people cant accept this boggles my mind, but if you had been paying attention you could easily have seen the silent majority hated and were embarrased by Trump. Those people came out in force to vote him out.
Ricky10
Well-known member
Yeah, the point is also the fact that nothing was ever called, yet Biden-Harris essentially decided to move forward with claiming these positions Saturday night.
Personally, I think 18 is too young of an age to be allowed to vote, not only are they more easily manipulated by the media, but they also don’t have enough experience in how certain policies affect their lives, or enough life experience in general.
Yes, I actually did hear about that too!
Jiigzz
Legend
AP called the election. They've been doing it for nearly 200 years.Yeah, the point is also the fact that nothing was ever called, yet Biden-Harris essentially decided to move forward with claiming these positions Saturday night.
Personally, I think 18 is too young of an age to be allowed to vote, not only are they more easily manipulated by the media, but they also don’t have enough experience in how certain policies affect their lives, or enough life experience in general.
Yes, I actually did hear about that too!
ax1
Legend
You do know the electoral collage doesnt cast its votes until January and any of them can turn on their oath (not sure oath, but its more like a commitment) and vote for whoever they want if they see fit.
Im just saying this in case you werent aware. They do flip votes, never has it ever effected an outcome of the election. I believe 4 years ago there were more electorals that flipped than ever before but it never effected the outcome.
ax1
Legend
The votes havent even been finished counting yet, there are at least a couple of hundred people willing to testify under oath to back irregularities and potential voter fraud.
Fox nor any other news network can call elections. They can only project them. With new suits filed today its not official.
71 MILLION people came out and counting have officially voted for Dump, an all time record, that beats Obobo's '08 all time record. Groper has 75 million if we make it official.
So your claiming some kind of real majority came out in force? And with what solution, replacing Dump with a big government hooligan who put more people in prison and terrorized people across the globe with wars and bombs??
LMFAO, at this point your just trolling, I know your way smarter than this. But ok, you can have your fun
Jiigzz
Legend
Last I checked, 75 million is more than 71 million, or is my math wrong? Which one is considered the majority?The votes havent even been finished counting yet, there are at least a couple of hundred people willing to testify under oath to back irregularities and potential voter fraud.
Fox nor any other news network can call elections. They can only project them. With new suits filed today its not official.
71 MILLION people came out and counting have officially voted for Dump, an all time record, that beats Obobo's '08 all time record. Groper has 75 million if we make it official.
So your claiming some kind of real majority came out in force? And with what solution, replacing Dump with a big government hooligan who put more people in prison and terrorized people across the globe with wars and bombs??
LMFAO, at this point your just trolling, I know your way smarter than this. But ok, you can have your fun
Jiigzz
Legend
Invalid Link RemovedThe votes havent even been finished counting yet, there are at least a couple of hundred people willing to testify under oath to back irregularities and potential voter fraud.
Fox nor any other news network can call elections. They can only project them. With new suits filed today its not official.
71 MILLION people came out and counting have officially voted for Dump, an all time record, that beats Obobo's '08 all time record. Groper has 75 million if we make it official.
So your claiming some kind of real majority came out in force? And with what solution, replacing Dump with a big government hooligan who put more people in prison and terrorized people across the globe with wars and bombs??
LMFAO, at this point your just trolling, I know your way smarter than this. But ok, you can have your fun
Jiigzz
Legend
I bet there is. Testifying under oath means nothing if you're a compulsive liar.The votes havent even been finished counting yet, there are at least a couple of hundred people willing to testify under oath to back irregularities and potential voter fraud.
Fox nor any other news network can call elections. They can only project them. With new suits filed today its not official.
71 MILLION people came out and counting have officially voted for Dump, an all time record, that beats Obobo's '08 all time record. Groper has 75 million if we make it official.
So your claiming some kind of real majority came out in force? And with what solution, replacing Dump with a big government hooligan who put more people in prison and terrorized people across the globe with wars and bombs??
LMFAO, at this point your just trolling, I know your way smarter than this. But ok, you can have your fun
25,000 lies and counting for Trump.
ax1
Legend
Come on man!
ax1
Legend
Thats extraordinarily less than the amount of children under the age of 5 Groper Joe murdered this past 1/2 a century.
Also, thats an extraordinarily less than the amount of black people Groper Joe had put in jail for a stupid bag of weed.
Come on man!
ax1
Legend
LMFAO I gotta get off the nets my tonsils are sore!
You want lies, you can start half a century ago and start counting. Will wait your response in a few months.
Invalid Link Removed
HIT4ME
Well-known member
Well, if Biden told the same lie 25,000 times over 47 years they would count it as one lie. But if Trump told the same lie 10 times over 4 years, they would say it was 40 lies.
They claim Trump lies and then he turns out to be right all the time as well. He says no Russian collusion, they go off the deep end and claim lies, and then he is found to be not guilty and they don't want to accept the truth.
We don't like the guy who lied to us for 4 years so we will vote for the guy who has done it for 47 years.
And I will never listen to another liberal tell me they are for term limits if they voted for Biden. Lets give people who make a career out if the government even more incentive by voting for career advancement.
ax1
Legend
OOoooopppssssiieeee Doosssiiiieeeee......Guess the CCP isnt going to make as much money off their little lab buggers they let out earlier this year just yet....
But dont worry folks, Groper Joe has a plan, and its war on the virus, just look at Afghanistan and its new ditches, Grope Joe always has a plan with his fiddley fingers with a stroke of that pen and send his lobby all the riches.
Brazil suspends trials of China's Sinovac coronavirus vaccine, citing 'serious adverse event'
Invalid Link Removed
But dont worry folks, Groper Joe has a plan, and its war on the virus, just look at Afghanistan and its new ditches, Grope Joe always has a plan with his fiddley fingers with a stroke of that pen and send his lobby all the riches.
Brazil suspends trials of China's Sinovac coronavirus vaccine, citing 'serious adverse event'
Invalid Link Removed
Last edited:
ax1
Legend
Well so much for CiaNN's sources and somehow they were claiming their "inside sources" said Melenia, Jared and all his insiders said Dump is coming to his senses after trying to talk him out of it. Like CiaNN knows what Melenia and Dump talk about all the time....
Just 48 minutes go
Invalid Link Removed
Just 48 minutes go
Invalid Link Removed
Last edited:
DaveGabe24
Well-known member
I'm a big fan of Feynman - one of my customers did an interesting video on WIRED Youtube about explaining CRISPR to 4 different levels of education (4 year old, teenager/hs, college, post-doc). There's a huge difference between "knowing" and "understanding" that is overlooked far too often in this era of instant access to information (regardless if it's right or wrong).
One of my questions to those who are so quick to toss out the value of scientific consensus with regards to climate change...how can you then justify accepting the same consensus with all of the other theories we accept? Gravity, evolution, buoyancy, laws of motion - etc?
It is a mental leap I have a hard time understanding. Genuinely curious. Do they feel qualified enough to discern that climate change data is not of the same quality as the other principles are built on? Hard for me to imagine that
DaveGabe24
Well-known member
Just for the record- because they lacked evidence to indict Trump directly doesn't absolve them all from wrongdoing...
The investigation garnered 199 criminal charges, 37 indictments or guilty pleas, and 5 prison sentences.
I'd say that at least found SOMETHING - no? To call the entire thing a hoax is to be willfully ignorant imo.
ax1
Legend
There was a leak they were feeding the scientific community false data to mislead them and the public in order to further a political agenda. Thats just one major leak. I dunno but I dont trust alot of things. Im all for advancing future energy and cleaning the environment as long as it makes economic sense and doesnt hurt poor people.
So climate change is actually more political than scientific, I mean climate change is real, it always was and always will be nobody will ever stop that, but the reasoning behind it is very questionable and scientists who have opposing views are quickly discredited, bullied and condemned. That is not science.
When there are trillions of dollars to be made watch out. They cant really tax you on gravity so thats a safe go, but they do tax you years before you are ever even born somehow
ax1
Legend
They are all crooks all across the board for the most part.
Problem is there are different rules for different folks, and when I see criminal treasonous lifetime corrupt thugs pressing charges on their political opponents I cant take any of this seriously.
ax1
Legend
^^^ Just think about it, the very same people after Dump are the very same people after the heads of Julian Assange and Edward Snowden who exposed how corrupt, immoral, unconstitutional filthy maggots they are. And Im not saying I support Dump, Im just calling as I see it and I dont get why 146 million people voted for either of them although Dump being the lesser of evils.
HIT4ME
Well-known member
My favorite is the articles popping up about Melania planning to divorce him when he leaves office. WTF does that have to do with anything?
Yes, knowing and understanding are big differences. Feynman used to say how his father taught him that knowing the names people used for something was basically useless - it didn't mean that you understood anything about the subject just because you knew the names. When you watch him speak, it is easy to miss just how advanced his intelligence was. He was almost childlike at times, and always normal in his speech - but this is a guy who was doing advanced mathematics before he was a teenager and helped develop the nuclear bomb before he even had his degree.
First, I'm not quick to toss out the consensus theories on climate change. I've asked numerous people who believe there is science behind global warming to provide me with the evidence, and to include any experiments that have tested the theories being proposed. I have read numerous attempts at "evidence" that these people have proposed. Most of the "studies" I've seen are actually models and applying the scrutiny to those models that we would apply to supplement studies on this board will obliterate their methodologies. And applying Feynman's standard of experimental testing of the idea ....well there isn't any of that. Granted, such experiments would be difficult to conduct - but that doesn't change the fact that they are still, as Feynman says, the sole source of the validity of the idea.
Gravity, the laws of motion, etc. - these are all things you can experiment with yourself, TBH. I have a friend who uses this same argument with the earth being flat for instance, why do we believe the consensus on that? I don't. And you will never hear someone say, "The earth is flat because everyone agrees it is flat" - which they did at one point all agree it was flat. You can see for yourself through experiment, observation and thought. Watch a boat come over the horizon and you see the mast before the boat comes up. Climb a tree and notice you can see further at the top of the tree than the bottom - something that wouldn't happen on a flat world. Place two sticks in the ground and measure the shadows - something that allows for the accurate calculation of the circumference of the earth with much greater accuracy than you would expect.
Likewise, no one ever says that there is gravity because there is a consensus that there is gravity. They will provide experimental evidence and reasoning - some of which you can test for yourself. If you drop something, it goes toward the earth with a great degree of predictability. If you drop two objects, they fall at the same rate once you account for resistance/friction. You can observe a terminal velocity. You can observe the motions of bodies in the sky and calculate their distances/pull on each other based on their motions.
Basically science doesn't prove things. It only disproves them. All you can do is make a guess, and then test that guess with an experiment. If your observations in the experiment do not support your guess, your guess was wrong. If you cannot test the guess, you have no proof that it is right or wrong, and you have not even been able to conduct the scientific method on it - thus it is not science, only a guess.
Interestingly enough, this is also the same criticism of one of the most advanced theories in physics - string theory. It is criticized as not being actual science because we have no way of testing it through experiment, in spite of all the mathematical support for the theory that has been created.
In other words, if someone has actual evidence of a theory, they explain and use that evidence to convince people of their theory - and you should never believe something that someone says you should believe because of consensus. If they cannot explain it and the evidence and reasoning simply, then they don't understand it (another Feymanism)- and if they don't understand it, how much of an expert are they really?
For instance, how would you feel if your mother was being treated for cancer and the doctor saw it and just said, "lets hit it with radiation" and you said, "Well, I read online that this might be a different type of cancer and that XYZ may be better to treat it" and he just said, "Well, this is what everyone does, it's the consensus among doctors."
vs. him responding, "I understand where you're coming from and you raise a good point. But XYZ treatment also does this and this which is risky and the radiation, while it may not have that one benefit you mention, has these 2 benefits which are typically more important to the outcome because.....and here is some evidence of what has been observed in both cases."
Who would you trust more?
I didn't say Trump has never done anything wrong. I'm sure he has, we all have at some point. They made a claim that he was colluding with Russia, and they pushed it heavily with no evidence, and in the end were not able to create enough evidence to support their claim in a court of law. 199 criminal charges of other people, 37 indictments, 5 prison sentences makes no difference, they weren't able to tie it to him at all. It was an utter sham that he had anything to do with it based on the evidence they would have gone to great lengths to dig up. Is it possible that they just couldn't find the evidence? Sure.
But they made the claim, and they should be held accountable for doing so without evidence. Otherwise, I could say you killed Joe Smith and you could be prosecuted right now. There's no evidence, but I'm making a claim, so you're guilty without evidence until you can prove that Joe Smith is alive and well. I know this is an exaggeration but logically it's the same type of jump and it is very scary and un-American. And the corruption that we let them do this with no evidence is astounding. Just like the Ukraine stuff - based on a docier they KNEW was false. But nobody cares, no one is going to pay for that, it's now acceptable. And people think Trump is the most corrupt guy in the room?
And it is also not the way a civilized society goes after criminals. You don't fabricate a crime that allows you to investigate a bunch of things that then lead you to other criminals. Well, apparently the FBI did with Trump, but lets take this to a more relatable level. Let's say you're out for a spin one night. I am a police officer and I randomly pull you over....I say you were speeding even though you were not. When I approach the car, everything is normal and nothing I can really do, so I claim that I smell alcohol on your breath and ask you to step out of the car...and perform a sobriety test. You pass, but I say you seemed to lose balance so I decided to investigate further and put you in my cruiser while I search your car for any evidence you were drinking. I go in there, and you have, say, a folding knife. Your knife is 3.5" long and the city we are in has a 3" limit on knives. Now I'm arresting you for possession of a deadly weapon. Is that OK?
I mean, I didn't NOT find anything. I didn't have any reason to pull you over, but I sure kept looking for reasons anyway. You weren't doing anything wrong per se. Ultimately you may have been driving through town and just unaware that this city had a knife limit, where the surrounding cities did not. The cop would have never known if he didn't make up a reason to pull you over and continue to search.
And how deep does someone have to search to find that you have done something wrong if they want to? It's sketchy.
thebigt
Legend
can you image what the demmies would do if trump ends up winning???
DaveGabe24
Well-known member
You're close but a bit off the mark with your generalization of how science operates, which is totally understandable as I believe you said you worked in a different field. With that, you're far better than 99% of people and their grasp of the philosophy of science. The concept of science only achieving falsification is where I think I'd like to offer another viewpoint for you.
It's a bit more nuanced. Science can neither prove nor disprove actually. It simply builds models and bodies of evidence to support for or against. We currently accept gravity as a theory because there has not been an anomaly to-date that suggests otherwise. So basically you operate within the confines of your paradigm until shown otherwise.
That's how "consensus" works. The world operated within the "rules" of flat earth until it was able to be shown those rules could be broken in certain instances.
I suppose to get to the crux of the issue it would take people far more advanced than us in statistical modeling, earth science, atmospheric science, etc to decide if their data suggests humans are making a meaningful impact on the rate of change in our climate.
To me, I defer to the experts in most cases until they're able to prove themselves wrong or refine their stance - which science will inevitably lead them to do to some extent.
As far as the oncology example - it almost comes down to bedside manner / semantics but I see your point. The problem is many who believe in climate change is an existential problem (and I think this is where we agree) lack the ability to support their stances. Let's not allow this to delegitimize the issue but instead, to me, it means they shouldn't be so adamant about their correctness along the way.
As far as the Russia stuff,
I find it to be more like Trump walked away from the bank robbery, maintained plausible deniability, and when everyone else was arrest - people were able to say see? He was innocent!! ... the bank was still robbed though.
So whether Trump directly interacted with Russia or not, they interfered with our elections and that seems to be well documented from governing bodies - no?
I'm open to being wrong on this tbh...I just think both sides taking their usual extremist sides of it being total proof or a complete hoax is lazy as usual.
-----------
On a side note...I discovered a website (haven't gone too deep into it so forgive me if it's actually terrible) but there's some real interesting work on here.
Excerpt and link below. Thought you may enjoy it.
"So, as a progressive, here is how you see American democracy: as a contest in which truth and reason are pitted against a quasicriminal political machine built on propaganda, ignorance and misinformation. Perhaps a cynical view of the world, but if you believe that progressivism is right, you must believe that conservatism is wrong, and you have no other option.
But there is an even more pessimistic view. Suppose American democracy is not a contest between truth and reason and a quasicriminal political machine, but a contest between two quasicriminal political machines? Suppose progressivism is just like conservatism? If it was, who would tell you?
Think of conservatism as a sort of mental disease. Virus X, transmitted by Fox News much as mosquitoes transmit malaria, has infected the brains of half the American population—causing them to believe that George W. Bush is a “regular guy,” global warming isn’t happening, and the US Army can bring democracy to Sadr City. Fortunately, the other half of America is protected by its progressive antibodies, which it imbibes every day in the healthy mother’s milk of the Times and NPR, allowing it to bask securely in the sweet light of truth."
Edit: I didn't want to quote too much but he goes on to explain that a Virus Y (Progressivism) may be just as harmful as "the other side."
A truly mind opening framework to read about. Maybe not adopt, but I'll at least expose myself to it.
Invalid Link Removed
It's a bit more nuanced. Science can neither prove nor disprove actually. It simply builds models and bodies of evidence to support for or against. We currently accept gravity as a theory because there has not been an anomaly to-date that suggests otherwise. So basically you operate within the confines of your paradigm until shown otherwise.
That's how "consensus" works. The world operated within the "rules" of flat earth until it was able to be shown those rules could be broken in certain instances.
I suppose to get to the crux of the issue it would take people far more advanced than us in statistical modeling, earth science, atmospheric science, etc to decide if their data suggests humans are making a meaningful impact on the rate of change in our climate.
To me, I defer to the experts in most cases until they're able to prove themselves wrong or refine their stance - which science will inevitably lead them to do to some extent.
As far as the oncology example - it almost comes down to bedside manner / semantics but I see your point. The problem is many who believe in climate change is an existential problem (and I think this is where we agree) lack the ability to support their stances. Let's not allow this to delegitimize the issue but instead, to me, it means they shouldn't be so adamant about their correctness along the way.
As far as the Russia stuff,
I find it to be more like Trump walked away from the bank robbery, maintained plausible deniability, and when everyone else was arrest - people were able to say see? He was innocent!! ... the bank was still robbed though.
So whether Trump directly interacted with Russia or not, they interfered with our elections and that seems to be well documented from governing bodies - no?
I'm open to being wrong on this tbh...I just think both sides taking their usual extremist sides of it being total proof or a complete hoax is lazy as usual.
-----------
On a side note...I discovered a website (haven't gone too deep into it so forgive me if it's actually terrible) but there's some real interesting work on here.
Excerpt and link below. Thought you may enjoy it.
"So, as a progressive, here is how you see American democracy: as a contest in which truth and reason are pitted against a quasicriminal political machine built on propaganda, ignorance and misinformation. Perhaps a cynical view of the world, but if you believe that progressivism is right, you must believe that conservatism is wrong, and you have no other option.
But there is an even more pessimistic view. Suppose American democracy is not a contest between truth and reason and a quasicriminal political machine, but a contest between two quasicriminal political machines? Suppose progressivism is just like conservatism? If it was, who would tell you?
Think of conservatism as a sort of mental disease. Virus X, transmitted by Fox News much as mosquitoes transmit malaria, has infected the brains of half the American population—causing them to believe that George W. Bush is a “regular guy,” global warming isn’t happening, and the US Army can bring democracy to Sadr City. Fortunately, the other half of America is protected by its progressive antibodies, which it imbibes every day in the healthy mother’s milk of the Times and NPR, allowing it to bask securely in the sweet light of truth."
Edit: I didn't want to quote too much but he goes on to explain that a Virus Y (Progressivism) may be just as harmful as "the other side."
A truly mind opening framework to read about. Maybe not adopt, but I'll at least expose myself to it.
Invalid Link Removed
Last edited:
manifesto
Well-known member
Short lived rioting....Trump would call on the national guard so fast. No need to restrain at that point.
DaveGabe24
Well-known member
"The right is mooing about faith, the left is mooing about change, and many are incensed about the fools on the other side—but, at the end of the day, they are the same folks we meet at the water cooler. "
I genuinely think outside of the world of sensationalist news stories, online facades, and all of the fear-mongering...the vast majority of Americans still have love and compassion for each other. Everyone genuinely wants to get ahead and get along.
Can only imagine what life would be like if clickbait and view counts didn't drive the sources being displayed before our eyes.
I genuinely think outside of the world of sensationalist news stories, online facades, and all of the fear-mongering...the vast majority of Americans still have love and compassion for each other. Everyone genuinely wants to get ahead and get along.
Can only imagine what life would be like if clickbait and view counts didn't drive the sources being displayed before our eyes.