https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6-tPTdm6xd4
What, not even a snarky comment? We can pretend even you didn't watch this.
Quote from: Baruch on December 24, 2017, 08:01:27 AM
What, not even a snarky comment? We can pretend even you didn't watch this.
No, I didn't bother to watch it. And I can't make a snarky statement about what I didn't watch. Something about Christmas. YAWN...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oG2ESfozdpk
In Sweden if you complain about no-go zones, you can be fined for a Crime of Opinion ;-( But then Sweden is a feminist monarchy.
Quote from: Cavebear on December 26, 2017, 06:23:59 AM
No, I didn't bother to watch it. And I can't make a snarky statement about what I didn't watch. Something about Christmas. YAWN...
its about the fact cities in the uk around christmas had to have road blocks, concrete dividers and scanners around christmas markets to stop certain groups of people driving there vans though crowded areas and killing people, like it happened in Berlin. It begs the question why do markets now need these kind of extreme measures these days.
(https://i.redd.it/gg8tislstw101.jpg)
(https://cdni.rt.com/files/2017.11/article/5a197f3afc7e93b93d8b456a.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C0mYeO0WQAAmTCF.jpg)
there, I just summarized it for you, now talk about it.
Quote from: Baruch on February 23, 2018, 05:00:47 AM
In Sweden if you complain about no-go zones, you can be fined for a Crime of Opinion ;-( But then Sweden is a feminist monarchy.
[Citation Needed]
Quote from: Jason78 on February 23, 2018, 07:20:20 AMQuote from: Baruch on February 23, 2018, 05:00:47 AM
In Sweden if you complain about no-go zones, you can be fined for a Crime of Opinion ;-( But then Sweden is a feminist monarchy.
[Citation Needed]
https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/ (https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/)
This is one of the reasons why I just roll my eyes over most of what Baruch posts and ignore what he has to say.
Getting the facts from Snopes.com? In a word, don't.
EXCLUSIVE: Facebook 'fact checker' who will arbitrate on 'fake news' is accused of defrauding website to pay for prostitutes - and its staff includes an escort-porn star and 'Vice Vixen domme' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html)
QuoteOne of them is a website called Snopes.com which claims to be one of the web's 'essential resources' and 'painstaking, scholarly and reliable'
It was founded by husband-and-wife Barbara and David Mikkelson, who used a letterhead claiming they were a non-existent society to start their research
Now they are divorced - with Barbara claiming in legal documents he embezzled $98,000 of company money and spent it on 'himself and prostitutes'
In a lengthy and bitter legal dispute he is claiming to be underpaid and demanding 'industry standard' or at least $360,000 a year
The two also dispute what are basic facts of their case - despite Snopes.com saying its 'ownership' is committed to 'accuracy and impartiality'
Snopes.com founder David Mikkelson's new wife Elyssa Young is employed by the website as an administrator
She has worked as an escort and porn actress and despite claims website is non-political ran as a Libertarian for Congress on a 'Dump Bush' platform
Its main 'fact checker' is Kimberly LaCapria, whose blog 'ViceVixen' says she is in touch with her 'domme side' and has posted on Snopes.com while smoking pot.
Quote from: Jason78 on February 23, 2018, 07:20:20 AM
[Citation Needed]
http://www.wnd.com/2018/02/man-fined-1265-for-crime-of-opinion/
I say, exile all the Dems to Sweden.
Quote from: Sal1981 on February 23, 2018, 08:07:09 AM
[Citation Needed]
https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/ (https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/)
This is one of the reasons why I just roll my eyes over most of what Baruch posts and ignore what he has to say.
Snopes has been disproven, as biased (Left). Sorry, there is no Sweden, no Muslims ... that man who was fined was victimized by a Trump Tweet.
If you were a real skeptic, you would say, that no rapes etc happen in Sweden, unless you were standing in the immediate vicinity as a witness to the crime ... but then that would only prove you are snorting cocaine with the Repubs (not toking MJ with the Dems).
Quote from: Sal1981 on February 23, 2018, 08:07:09 AM
[Citation Needed]
https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/ (https://www.snopes.com/sweden-crime-no-go-zone-police/)
This is one of the reasons why I just roll my eyes over most of what Baruch posts and ignore what he has to say.
I Love Snopes!
Quote from: Cavebear on February 25, 2018, 02:04:33 AM
I Love Snopes!
I love Onion. Both are Alex Jones for intelligent people.
Quote from: Baruch on February 25, 2018, 08:22:27 AM
I love Onion. Both are Alex Jones for intelligent people.
Onion is damned good humor, but Snopes is damned good facts and I like that better. I could write Onion stuff, but facts take work.
Quote from: pr126 on February 23, 2018, 08:23:02 AM
Getting the facts from Snopes.com? In a word, don't.
EXCLUSIVE: Facebook 'fact checker' who will arbitrate on 'fake news' is accused of defrauding website to pay for prostitutes - and its staff includes an escort-porn star and 'Vice Vixen domme' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4042194/Facebook-fact-checker-arbitrate-fake-news-accused-defrauding-website-pay-prostitutes-staff-includes-escort-porn-star-Vice-Vixen-domme.html)
And so what? Are you saying porn actors can't check for facts? Or that pot smokers are unassailable error makers?
Quote from: Cavebear on February 25, 2018, 02:22:38 PM
Onion is damned good humor, but Snopes is damned good facts and I like that better. I could write Onion stuff, but facts take work.
Snopes is like Wiki ... propaganda by the usual suspects.
Quote from: Sal1981 on February 25, 2018, 03:04:40 PM
And so what? Are you saying porn actors can't check for facts? Or that pot smokers are unassailable error makers?
He would say ... if it isn't me, then the liars lie. I would agree with him on that. I don't accept anyone's facts ... they are apes, same reason why I won't accept facts from an orangutan.
Quote from: Baruch on February 25, 2018, 08:53:47 PM
Snopes is like Wiki ... propaganda by the usual suspects.
Snopes is an accuracy site.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 28, 2018, 04:31:38 AM
Snopes is an accuracy site.
(https://m.popkey.co/b47d83/A5kjp.gif)
There is nothing online that isn't manipulated by Evil Genius Trump or Evil Genius Putin.
Quote from: pr126 on February 28, 2018, 05:43:10 AM
NO.
Would you care to give a few examples? If you can, I'll give a dozen...
I trust Snopes.com less than Wikipedia.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 28, 2018, 08:36:40 AM
Would you care to give a few examples? If you can, I'll give a dozen...
https://foodbabe.com/do-you-trust-snopes-you-wont-after-reading-how-they-work-with-monsanto-operatives/
Quote from: pr126 on February 28, 2018, 08:39:55 AM
I trust Snopes.com less than Wikipedia.
And don't trust Wiki ... it is CIA.
Quote from: pr126 on February 28, 2018, 08:39:55 AM
I trust Snopes.com less than Wikipedia.
That's some examples? You are losing your touch. You once backed up your claims...
Anyone who trusts anyone else ... is a fool. We are talking about shit throwing apes here. So much for a well informed citizenry.
Quote from: Munch on February 28, 2018, 08:53:30 AM
https://foodbabe.com/do-you-trust-snopes-you-wont-after-reading-how-they-work-with-monsanto-operatives/
I notice that the article gave no specific examples of false claims about Snopes. Did you see any actual ones?
THAT is what "fakes news" is. Claims without actual evidence.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 28, 2018, 02:17:54 PM
I notice that the article gave no specific examples of false claims about Snopes. Did you see any actual ones?
THAT is what "fakes news" is. Claims without actual evidence.
Oh, CIA, FBI, DNC ...
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 02:20:28 PM
Oh, CIA, FBI, DNC ...
Ah the initials beloved by the crazed conspiracy-minded...
Quote from: Munch on February 28, 2018, 08:53:30 AM
https://foodbabe.com/do-you-trust-snopes-you-wont-after-reading-how-they-work-with-monsanto-operatives/
The Food Babe? The
Food Babe is calling Snopes (or anyone else) untrustworthy? BWAHAHAHAHAHAA!
Man, that was good for a laugh! Thanks!
Quote from: Cavebear on February 28, 2018, 02:24:54 PM
Ah the initials beloved by the crazed conspiracy-minded...
They exist ... do you deny it?
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on February 28, 2018, 06:09:44 PM
The Food Babe? The Food Babe is calling Snopes (or anyone else) untrustworthy? BWAHAHAHAHAHAA!
Man, that was good for a laugh! Thanks!
Hillary calling Trump (or anyone else) untrustworthy? BWAHAHAHAHAHAA!
I know you're trying to again draw a false equivalence, but it still doesn't work.
Quote from: Munch on February 28, 2018, 08:53:30 AM
https://foodbabe.com/do-you-trust-snopes-you-wont-after-reading-how-they-work-with-monsanto-operatives/
FFS (https://www.csicop.org/si/show/the_food_babe_a_taste_of_her_own_medicine)
Conservatives: Wikipedia and Snopes are untrustworthy! Now check out my Fox News links, Infowars videos, and Patriot4America blog posts!
I can understand why Baruch took umbrage of me shitting on the Food Boob; he is, after all, an organic food nut who doesn't seem to realize that the organic food industry is just that â€" an industry. It has just as little regard for the safety and quality of human life as would the conventional food industry, because the both of them are after the same thing: profit über alles.
The Food Babe is a wacka-loon with a proven record of being scientifically ignorant, whereas Snopes has a similarly proven record of researched debunking, all the way from its days as a site debunking urban myths. The Food Babe calling Snopes untrustworthy is like Conservapedia calling the Encyclopedia Britannica untrustworthy. Neither would know what trustworthiness is if it walked up to them and bit them on the leg.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on February 28, 2018, 09:03:41 PM
I know you're trying to again draw a false equivalence, but it still doesn't work.
Politicians are all alike. The denial of that is the very basis of political behavior. Jackanapes.
Quote from: Hydra009 on February 28, 2018, 09:14:11 PM
Conservatives: Wikipedia and Snopes are untrustworthy! Now check out my Fox News links, Infowars videos, and Patriot4America blog posts!
No problem, I am not conservative. I am traditional. Big difference.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on February 28, 2018, 09:31:26 PM
I can understand why Baruch took umbrage of me shitting on the Food Boob; he is, after all, an organic food nut who doesn't seem to realize that the organic food industry is just that â€" an industry. It has just as little regard for the safety and quality of human life as would the conventional food industry, because the both of them are after the same thing: profit über alles.
The Food Babe is a wacka-loon with a proven record of being scientifically ignorant, whereas Snopes has a similarly proven record of researched debunking, all the way from its days as a site debunking urban myths. The Food Babe calling Snopes untrustworthy is like Conservapedia calling the Encyclopedia Britannica untrustworthy. Neither would know what trustworthiness is if it walked up to them and bit them on the leg.
And you are hung from your own petard, even if you aren't a military engineer as I once was. The false equivalence is if Source X is actually right about something, it is right about everything. And if Source Y is actually wrong about something, it is wrong about everything.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 09:38:37 PM
No problem, I am not conservative. I am traditional. Big difference.
I can't see the difference, frankly.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 09:37:52 PM
Politicians are all alike. The denial of that is the very basis of political behavior. Jackanapes.
Yes yes, politicians are all alike except where they aren't. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knew that Trump is untrustworthy, so Hillary stating such would be just be stating the fucking obvious.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 09:39:58 PM
And you are hung from your own petard, even if you aren't a military engineer as I once was.
I don't believe for a fucking second that you were ever a military engineer.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 09:39:58 PM
The false equivalence is if Source X is actually right about something, it is right about everything. And if Source Y is actually wrong about something, it is wrong about everything.
Sheesh, Baruch, would it kill ya to actually look up (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence) what a false equivalence entails?
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on February 28, 2018, 09:47:54 PM
I can't see the difference, frankly.
Yes yes, politicians are all alike except where they aren't. Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knew that Trump is untrustworthy, so Hillary stating such would be just be stating the fucking obvious.
I don't believe for a fucking second that you were ever a military engineer.
Sheesh, Baruch, would it kill ya to actually look up (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_equivalence) what a false equivalence entails?
So ... once again you resort to ad hominem. Do you have any other bad rhetorical cards up your sleeve?
Yes, it is part of your ideology, to fetishize progress, demonize regress ... and no, Traditional doesn't equal reactionary either. I simply recognize that our ancestors weren't idiots because they didn't have the iPhone X.
What you believe matters not to me. I was a "civilian" military engineer ... if that is the hair you are splitting.
And you misuse "false equivalence" .. I used a rhetorical technique, and you mistake that for the point I was making. You dare not understand that point.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 10:07:04 PM
So ... once again you resort to ad hominem. Do you have any other bad rhetorical cards up your sleeve?
What ad hominem?
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 10:07:04 PM
Yes, it is part of your ideology, to fetishize progress, demonize regress ... and no, Traditional doesn't equal reactionary either. I simply recognize that our ancestors weren't idiots because they didn't have the iPhone X.
Neither do I, but to say that we're not in a better position to evaluate their choices now than in the past is patently absurd. Yes, even though they weren't idiots, they can still be wrong from lack of information. Cavemen weren't idiots for staying in caves, but we have much better alternatives now.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 10:07:04 PM
What you believe matters not to me. I was a "civilian" military engineer ... if that is the hair you are splitting.
I don't believe you were ever an engineer at all, civilian, military, or "civilian" military. You've made too many mistakes in basic engineering (like saying that a watt is a unit of energy) to lead me to that conclusion.
Quote from: Baruch on February 28, 2018, 10:07:04 PM
And you misuse "false equivalence" .. I used a rhetorical technique, and you mistake that for the point I was making. You dare not understand that point.
You have a rich fantasy life. Snopes may not be 100% accurate, but it's going to be
much more accurate than some idiot on the internet with a proven track record of being scientifically ignorant. And someone who is willing to poison the well using irrelevant references to Monsanto deserves to be poisoned themselves.
Yeah, Pravda on the Potomac or Tass on the Hudson aren't 100% accurate. OK genius, tell me the Latin name of that fallacy? I am not a Fox fan, never have been.
Yes, I am getting old and sloppy. You can clean up my dribble after I eat ... if you want ;-)) I do use Google etc to cover for memory failures, but I don't rely on it for understanding.
Knowledge isn't the same as understanding. Knowledge is valuable, understanding is priceless. In these days of Internet, every idiot has access to infinite knowledge (which statistically turns out to be mutually contradictory) ... but I would take Socrates over them any day. Try using dimensional reduction to make sense of that, if you can.
Yes, the D administrations since the 19th century onward ... all fantasy purveyors. Wasn't the Buchanan administration our first gay administration? That is the prior Obama was emulating ... also the last admin before Civil War. Gotta make Wakanda proud.
Quote from: Baruch on March 01, 2018, 05:23:20 AM
Yeah, Pravda on the Potomac or Tass on the Hudson aren't 100% accurate. OK genius, tell me the Latin name of that fallacy? I am not a Fox fan, never have been.
Yes, I am getting old and sloppy. You can clean up my dribble after I eat ... if you want ;-)) I do use Google etc to cover for memory failures, but I don't rely on it for understanding.
Knowledge isn't the same as understanding. Knowledge is valuable, understanding is priceless. In these days of Internet, every idiot has access to infinite knowledge (which statistically turns out to be mutually contradictory) ... but I would take Socrates over them any day. Try using dimensional reduction to make sense of that, if you can.
Yes, the D administrations since the 19th century onward ... all fantasy purveyors. Wasn't the Buchanan administration our first gay administration? That is the prior Obama was emulating ... also the last admin before Civil War. Gotta make Wakanda proud.
You are now informally set on "ignore". You are just nuts. I give up on you.
That will give you more time to read your Washington Post and NYT.
And it isn't working. The Admins are baffled. Congrats.