(November 6, 2022 at 5:42 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote:

(November 6, 2022 at 4:29 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I’m not sure ‘admitting’ describes it best. That word implies something along the lines of an error that one feels guilty or ashamed about. I glory in picking nits. I revel in it. My favourite time of year is the annual nit harvest - nothing stirs me live seeing the sunlit fields of nit-stalks, waving majestically in the breeze.

Do NOT compare my dealings with you with the way I interacted with 37. There is nothing similar between the two.

I can’t tell you which bits I agreed or disagreed with, because I didn’t read it. As I told you before, I’m not that interested. But, by referring to its author snidely as a ‘blog poster’, you’re re-enforcing the idea that you’re less concerned with what people say than who happens to be saying it.

Boru

So you never read Helios' blog poster link? I see. Did you even read the Intercept article? When people don't care about something, they usually don't comment on it and call out others for not reading links they haven't even read themselves, but you do you. And the nitpicking was fine and I'm glad to be corrected on my minor error, so thank you for that, as I like to have mistakes pointed out so I don't make them again, but I think multiple posts going on about that minor point was a bit much, but that's just imo.

If it was a blog poster that was making sense, then fine, but you haven't even read the link yourself, so how do you know the author/blog poster is not making as crazy of points as Alex Jones saying no children died at Sandy Hook? How can you criticize me for criticizing something you haven't even read?

My problem is not just that it's a blog poster, but that it's a blog poster who didn't do the proper research and admitted to posting misinformation multiple times in his own blog post. And the website appears to be passing itself off as some type of news website, when it seems to be a blog poster posting WWE memes who doesn't do the proper research before posting misinformation, which again, the author admits to, if you would just take a look at the article.

I’m not criticizing your position. I’m criticizing the fact that you off hand rejected a refutation of your position based on nothing more than the fact that it came from ‘a blog poster’. It doesn’t matter that I haven’t read it.

Suppose someone came up with a stunningly effective plan for the world economy. It would solve hunger, empower women, raise the global standard of living, etc. but the plan was rejected on the basis that its author was left handed. I would need to examine the plan to know that left-handedness is a stupid reason for rejecting it.

Boru

(November 6, 2022 at 5:56 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(November 6, 2022 at 5:42 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: So you never read Helios' blog poster link? I see. Did you even read the Intercept article? When people don't care about something, they usually don't comment on it and call out others for not reading links they haven't even read themselves, but you do you. And the nitpicking was fine and I'm glad to be corrected on my minor error, so thank you for that, as I like to have mistakes pointed out so I don't make them again, but I think multiple posts going on about that minor point was a bit much, but that's just imo.

If it was a blog poster that was making sense, then fine, but you haven't even read the link yourself, so how do you know the author/blog poster is not making as crazy of points as Alex Jones saying no children died at Sandy Hook? How can you criticize me for criticizing something you haven't even read?

My problem is not just that it's a blog poster, but that it's a blog poster who didn't do the proper research and admitted to posting misinformation multiple times in his own blog post. And the website appears to be passing itself off as some type of news website, when it seems to be a blog poster posting WWE memes who doesn't do the proper research before posting misinformation, which again, the author admits to, if you would just take a look at the article.

I’m not criticizing your position. I’m criticizing the fact that you off hand rejected a refutation of your position based on nothing more than the fact that it came from ‘a blog poster’. It doesn’t matter that I haven’t read it.

Suppose someone came up with a stunningly effective plan for the world economy. It would solve hunger, empower women, raise the global standard of living, etc. but the plan was rejected on the basis that its author was left handed. I would need to examine the plan to know that left-handedness is a stupid reason for rejecting it.

Boru

That's not true. I did not off hand reject the blog posts' content because it was a blog post. You're free to disbelieve me, but I told you I went into their arguments with an open mind, and I found their arguments severely lacking, and they admitted to posting misinformation multiple times in their own blog post, which shows that they don't do their research first before posting, and I just admitted to you that yes, technically a blog poster that is posting WWE memes could perfectly debunk the Intercept article, and if they did that to my satisfaction, then I would no longer accept the Intercept article as accurate. Someone posting WWE memes and Pepe memes all day could cure cancer or solve world hunger like you said, sure. I concede to that. Most anything is possible, I suppose.

(November 6, 2022 at 6:09 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote:

(November 6, 2022 at 5:56 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I’m not criticizing your position. I’m criticizing the fact that you off hand rejected a refutation of your position based on nothing more than the fact that it came from ‘a blog poster’. It doesn’t matter that I haven’t read it.

Suppose someone came up with a stunningly effective plan for the world economy. It would solve hunger, empower women, raise the global standard of living, etc. but the plan was rejected on the basis that its author was left handed. I would need to examine the plan to know that left-handedness is a stupid reason for rejecting it.

Boru

That's not true. I did not off hand reject the blog posts' content because it was a blog post. You're free to disbelieve me, but I told you I went into their arguments with an open mind, and I found their arguments severely lacking, and they admitted to posting misinformation multiple times in their own blog post, which shows that they don't do their research first before posting, and I just admitted to you that yes, technically a blog poster that is posting WWE memes could perfectly debunk the Intercept article, and if they did that to my satisfaction, then I would no longer accept the Intercept article as accurate. Someone posting WWE memes and Pepe memes all day could cure cancer or solve world hunger like you said, sure. I concede to that. Most anything is possible, I suppose.

Since I’m free to disbelieve you, I’ll opt for that.

Boru

(November 6, 2022 at 6:33 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(November 6, 2022 at 6:09 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: That's not true. I did not off hand reject the blog posts' content because it was a blog post. You're free to disbelieve me, but I told you I went into their arguments with an open mind, and I found their arguments severely lacking, and they admitted to posting misinformation multiple times in their own blog post, which shows that they don't do their research first before posting, and I just admitted to you that yes, technically a blog poster that is posting WWE memes could perfectly debunk the Intercept article, and if they did that to my satisfaction, then I would no longer accept the Intercept article as accurate. Someone posting WWE memes and Pepe memes all day could cure cancer or solve world hunger like you said, sure. I concede to that. Most anything is possible, I suppose.

Since I’m free to disbelieve you, I’ll opt for that.

Boru

You would be wise to do so. Also, everything else he's saying is nonsense as nothing would satisfy him ( as if anyone cares about what he finds convincing) nor did he debunk or even remotely challenge the article I cited he just invents excuses to dismiss it.....

(November 6, 2022 at 7:12 am)Helios Wrote:

(November 6, 2022 at 6:33 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Since I’m free to disbelieve you, I’ll opt for that.

Boru

You would be wise to do so. Also, everything else he's saying is nonsense as nothing would satisfy him ( as if anyone cares about what he finds convincing) nor did he debunk or even remotely challenge the article I cited he just invents excuses to dismiss it.....

Says the man who refuses to engage with this topic at all. Your entire take on this topic was 6 words. 2 three word posts, citing that you think it's very fake news, and then after that, no more engagement by you on the topic outside of posting a link. No engagement or arguments coming from anyone in this thread yet, actually. Just links. Can I get an actual forum member that has an opinion on this topic that's more insightful than a 3 word post, maybe? I'll give you credit though, Helios. At least your engagement on the topic was three word posts rather than a two word spam post, which is all Tomato could muster up.

You have received the exact amount and kind of engagement your nonsense warrants on this thread and nothing more.

(November 4, 2022 at 2:23 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: US government shadow censoring across all social media. How about them frozen peaches now, huh Nudge?

Looking as firm as ever.  One day you might want to explore your need to seek out confirmation on these things no matter how contrived or contorted.  How you've gone from worrying that these things might be true, to needing and or wanting them to be true.  That's the point at which the radicalizers responsibility for this nonsense has ended, and your own picked up the torch and took it from there. Once upon a time, or so we've been lead to believe, cynical assholes were taking advantage of you. No longer. You've got that handled all by your onesies. If they stopped, and moved on to the next grift...which they inevitably will, you wouldn't.

(November 6, 2022 at 12:43 pm)The Grand Nudger Wrote:

(November 4, 2022 at 2:23 am)Irreligious Atheist Wrote: US government shadow censoring across all social media. How about them frozen peaches now, huh Nudge?

Looking as firm as ever.  One day you might want to explore your need to seek out confirmation on these things no matter how contrived or contorted.  How you've gone from worrying that these things might be true, to needing and or wanting them to be true.  That's the point at which the radicalizers responsibility for this nonsense has ended, and your own picked up the torch and took it from there.  Once upon a time, or so we've been lead to believe, cynical assholes were taking advantage of you.  No longer.  You've got that handled all by your onesies.  If they stopped, and moved on to the next grift...which they inevitably will, you wouldn't.

Ah, yes, I want and need government censorship to be true. I just love the stuff. You've got me all figured out, Nudge. I remember 15 or 20 years ago watching this whacky lady who was supposedly called an expert on conspiracy theorists, saying that 9/11 truthers believe what they do because they want it to be true. That they want to believe that everything is under control, and that nothing just happens by happenstance. That they want to believe that there is an order to the world. Are you getting your arguments from her, Nudge? No, 9/11 truthers do not want a one world cabal knocking down towers, anti-Semites do not yearn to be ruled over by a Jewish Cabal, and I myself do not want the government to be censoring social media online. And hey, if you'd like, we can go on pretending that free speech still exists, since I suppose it does on a technical level, since these companies are willingly working with government officials in the censorship, and since the government isn't locking people up for speech. Freedom of speech lives on. Nothing to worry about. Things are looking fine and dandy.

(November 6, 2022 at 10:20 am)Helios Wrote: You have received the exact amount and kind of engagement your nonsense warrants on this thread and nothing more.

My nonsense? Since when do I work for the Intercept? When you refuse to engage on the actual topic and all you have are repeated ad hominem attacks, that says all that needs to be said. And coming from the guy who still denies the Hunter Biden laptop which has been confirmed by even MSM and the government now. Have you ever in your life admitted to being wrong about anything?

So more nothing gotcha.