ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , internet incidents , Trump controversies , US-Russia relations , vladimir putin

Reply
Old 7th January 2017, 01:40 PM   #321
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,453
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
What is extreme is your demand that a few random people should be considered an oracle, apparently because your ideology requires this. How is this different from some religious cult?



It doesn't work at all.
Random people? No, not random people. People trained in the intelligence services, on the one hand, and people selected to represent them in Congress on the other. You may pretend that these qualifications are irrelevant, but tain't so.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 01:41 PM   #322
NoahFence
Psycho Kitty
 
NoahFence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 20,899
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post

Quote:
Quote:
The evidence is confidential.
Evidence? For all we know it doesn't exist, it could have been fabricated, pulled out of context, or any other number of possibilities.
I'm wondering if in your mind, one of the possibilities is that it was accurate?
__________________
you to the ignorant, uneducated portion ofAmerica too short sighted to see what's right in front of your cheeto loving faces.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 01:43 PM   #323
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,453
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
Then we should ignore the claims
Out of curiosity, and I really don't know the answer here, do we have any declassified evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons? If not, do you also ignore those claims?

ETA: Just to be clear, my question has nothing at all to do with anti-Semitism. I chose Israel just because their possession of nukes is more or less universally acknowledged, but not publicly proclaimed.

Last edited by phiwum; 7th January 2017 at 01:45 PM.
phiwum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 02:04 PM   #324
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by zorro99 View Post
As stated, the declassified report does not contain specific evidence as doing so would compromise intelligence sources and methods.
Evidence?

Quote:
However, I suspect that President Obama will declassify portions of the report prior to his leaving office.
Sure, I can wait for some evidence, I'm not in a hurry.

Quote:
In the meantime, here's a good article from the NYT providing a pretty good case using publicly-available information that the Russians successfully phished Podesta's email credentials. I suggested reading it in full prior to commenting:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...imes&smtyp=cur
Who are "the Russians"? And how exactly do we know it was them as opposed to someone else?

Quote:
BTW: Mr. Trump asserted that a 400-pound man from his bed hacked the DNC.
Evidence?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 7th January 2017 at 02:12 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 02:07 PM   #325
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Random people? No, not random people.
True, it's not random, it's the people who would be the least likely to be trustworthy. That's even worse than random.

Quote:
People trained in the intelligence services, on the one hand, and people selected to represent them in Congress on the other. You may pretend that these qualifications are irrelevant, but tain't so.
These qualifications are as relevant as having the qualification of village idiot.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin

Last edited by caveman1917; 7th January 2017 at 02:11 PM.
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 02:13 PM   #326
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,276
Originally Posted by phiwum View Post
Out of curiosity, and I really don't know the answer here, do we have any declassified evidence that Israel has nuclear weapons? If not, do you also ignore those claims?

ETA: Just to be clear, my question has nothing at all to do with anti-Semitism. I chose Israel just because their possession of nukes is more or less universally acknowledged, but not publicly proclaimed.
I would also ignore that. I am willing to say people make that claim. But it is a claim that hasn't been presented to me with evidence.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 02:35 PM   #327
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by zorro99 View Post
In the meantime, here's a good article from the NYT providing a pretty good case using publicly-available information that the Russians successfully phished Podesta's email credentials. I suggested reading it in full prior to commenting:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...imes&smtyp=cur
That's a rather generic overview of what phishing is and a whole lot of conjecture attempting to demonstrate how the group behind the phishing might be Russian.

So this brings it to the level of hypothesis.

We've been at hypothesis for months, now.

There's some circumstantial evidence about that can raise my estimate to 'plausible' or 'credible', but it's still a long, long walk to 'proven' from there.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 02:45 PM   #328
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,871
I don't buy this supposed skepticism about the CIA claims. The skeptical parties are for the most part either extreme left Putin sycophants, or extreme right Trumpistas - who, by the way, had no problem when the FBI head said there might be some emails on a computer somewhere. It's selective skepticism at the best of times, and is simply not credible.

For the rational people out there: we're not going to see the evidence, so we can simply stop speculating. Instead, it's a matter of trust. The US intelligence agencies, various bi-partisan senators and the POTUS or Donald "Pussygrabber" Trump and Vladimir Putin.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:06 PM   #329
AlaskaBushPilot
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,861
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
This point is really really dumb.
Oh surprise, surprise - racist, sexist, dumb, etc.

It isn't an argument. This is the failed strategy of the losers in this election who spent $1.2 billion dollars and had every advantage of the media, establishment muscle etc. on their side and still lost.

Because there isn't a platform. There aren't principles. There is just antisocial conduct directed against anyone who disagrees.



Quote:
We have discussed them endlessly. Some had their own threads. We had threads about the content. This thread is about the process of releasing them.
No it isn't. It would not be following the ridiculous establishment Russiaphobe line if that were true. We would see evidence, not hot air. Like Wikileaks emphatically certifying Russia is not the source.

This is even worse than during the Iraq WMD propaganda, which was easy enough to see for the incompetence of it. Yellow cake forgery, silly cartoon diagrams, etc.

What this tells us is how desperate the establishment is to change the subject and keep the eyes off the CONTENT of the emails. Same with you.

Oh, how DARE I talk about this being a distraction. The only legitimate discussion is what you, the censor, dictates to me.

Wikileaks says they have more blockbuster stuff coming out and the diversionary twaddle about Russia can't stop it.

AlaskaBushPilot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:15 PM   #330
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I don't buy this supposed skepticism about the CIA claims. The skeptical parties are for the most part either extreme left Putin sycophants, or extreme right Trumpistas - who, by the way, had no problem when the FBI head said there might be some emails on a computer somewhere. It's selective skepticism at the best of times, and is simply not credible.

For the rational people out there: we're not going to see the evidence, so we can simply stop speculating. Instead, it's a matter of trust. The US intelligence agencies, various bi-partisan senators and the POTUS or Donald "Pussygrabber" Trump and Vladimir Putin.
Credibility is not a pass/fail system solely predicated upon whether even less reputable examples exist. The election is over, time to put 'but the other side is worse(!)' arguments away until 2020.

You're going down the 'shame them' route by trying to suggest criticism of the information is support of Trump or Putin. If you have to rely on that to make your case, guess what that says about your case?
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:27 PM   #331
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,871
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Credibility is not a pass/fail system solely predicated upon whether even less reputable examples exist. The election is over, time to put 'but the other side is worse(!)' arguments away until 2020.
No, now is the time to point out every single thing until Trump goes away into history in infamy. Russia meddling in the US election to get Trump to the Presidency would seriously - if not irreparably damage the legitimacy of his Presidency. That's why his sycophants don't want us to focus on it. That's the reason we need to focus more on it. Keep pushing, and eventually the whole rotten corrupted mess will come tumbling down.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
You're going down the 'shame them' route by trying to suggest criticism of the information is support of Trump or Putin.
No, I'm pointing out the obvious. There is no shaming these people. If there was, they would be perpetually curled into a whimpering ball considering how shameful their behavior is.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
If you have to rely on that to make your case, guess what that says about your case?
It's not my case. It's the case of the US intelligence agencies. I'm pointing out to you why you shouldn't expect to ever see the evidence. You can then either chose to accept that the US intelligence agencies are actually doing their jobs, or you can concoct a conspiracy theory. Your choice.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 7th January 2017 at 03:34 PM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:36 PM   #332
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,276
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot View Post
Oh surprise, surprise - racist, sexist, dumb, etc.

It isn't an argument. This is the failed strategy of the losers in this election who spent $1.2 billion dollars and had every advantage of the media, establishment muscle etc. on their side and still lost.

Because there isn't a platform. There aren't principles. There is just antisocial conduct directed against anyone who disagrees.





No it isn't. It would not be following the ridiculous establishment Russiaphobe line if that were true. We would see evidence, not hot air. Like Wikileaks emphatically certifying Russia is not the source.

This is even worse than during the Iraq WMD propaganda, which was easy enough to see for the incompetence of it. Yellow cake forgery, silly cartoon diagrams, etc.

What this tells us is how desperate the establishment is to change the subject and keep the eyes off the CONTENT of the emails. Same with you.

Oh, how DARE I talk about this being a distraction. The only legitimate discussion is what you, the censor, dictates to me.

Wikileaks says they have more blockbuster stuff coming out and the diversionary twaddle about Russia can't stop it.

What the hell are you talking about? I can link you to the threads where we discussed the content of DNc and Podesta emails. We did not ignore their content. You can even post there, I don't think they are locked. This is not the contents thread.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:52 PM   #333
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
No, now is the time to point out every single thing until Trump goes away into history in infamy. Russia meddling in the US election to get Trump to the Presidency would seriously - if not irreparably damage the legitimacy of his Presidency. That's why his sycophants don't want us to focus on it. That's the reason we need to focus more on it. Keep pushing, and eventually the whole rotten corrupted mess will come tumbling down.
So do you want focus on the issue at hand or do you want to go off on rants about Trump and broad-brush denunciations of the alleged motives of anyone taking a critical position of the claims?

Quote:
No, I'm pointing out the obvious. There is no shaming these people. If there was, they would be perpetually curled into a whimpering ball considering how shameful their behavior is.
I guess I have my answer.

Quote:
It's not my case. It's the case of the US intelligence agencies. I'm pointing out to you why you shouldn't expect to ever see the evidence. You can then either chose to accept that the US intelligence agencies are actually doing their jobs, or you can concoct a conspiracy theory. Your choice.
False dichotomy.

I can state that without evidence to back up the assertions made, I cannot reasonably conclude their accuracy. That is neither accepting the claim nor concocting a conspiracy. I have floated a speculation or two as to what possible motives may exist for misrepresenting the data, but I have just the same lack of evidence as they do. Nor do I rule out other possibilities like misunderstanding the data they rest their conclusions on or data being planted that leads investigators to an intended conclusion on the part of those who pulled it off, etc.

But more than anything, I have to laugh at anyone claiming to want this issue focused on who then turns around and accuses others not reaching the same conclusion as them of <insert derogatory language here>. You want me to 'trust' agencies with dubious and checkered histories? That makes this a discussion about belief.

I'll show myself out if that's the case. LOL
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 03:57 PM   #334
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,871
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
So do you want focus on the issue at hand or do you want to go off on rants about Trump and broad-brush denunciations of the alleged motives of anyone taking a critical position of the claims?
You're the one focusing on my post. If you didn't like what I wrote, you can always ignore it. As it is, I stand by every word.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
False dichotomy.
Nope.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
I can state that without evidence to back up the assertions made, I cannot reasonably conclude their accuracy. That is neither accepting the claim nor concocting a conspiracy. I have floated a speculation or two as to what possible motives may exist for misrepresenting the data, but I have just the same lack of evidence as they do. Nor do I rule out other possibilities like misunderstanding the data they rest their conclusions on or data being planted that leads investigators to an intended conclusion on the part of those who pulled it off, etc.
As I said, you can either accept their conclusions, or make up **** and not accept it.

They don't have a lack of evidence. They just have a lack of evidence that you are cleared to view.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
But more than anything, I have to laugh at anyone claiming to want this issue focused on who then turns around and accuses others not reaching the same conclusion as them of <insert derogatory language here>. You want me to 'trust' agencies with dubious and checkered histories? That makes this a discussion about belief.
Honestly, I don't care who or what you trust. You don't matter in the grand scheme of things. What matters is that this issue is thoroughly investigated by law enforcement, and that there are impeachment procedures against the incoming administration should it be shown that Trump or any of his staff in any way coordinated with the Russian hackers.

ETA: I would also add that if there aren't congressional investigations into this, it is only because the GOP is too corrupt to investigate one of their own.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1

Last edited by uke2se; 7th January 2017 at 04:00 PM.
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 04:17 PM   #335
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
You're the one focusing on my post. If you didn't like what I wrote, you can always ignore it. As it is, I stand by every word.
It's not so much that I didn't like it, it's that rather than supply a substantive response, you chose to wander off into judgmental excoriation and impugning motives (with your fantastic mind reader skillz!).

Quote:
Nope.
Yes, when you state that 'you can choose a or you can choose b' when c, d, e, f, g, and many other possibilities are available, that is a false dichotomy.

Quote:
As I said, you can either accept their conclusions, or make up **** and not accept it.
See, here's another example of you doing it again. Literally one line after denying you did it.

Quote:
They don't have a lack of evidence. They just have a lack of evidence that you are cleared to view.
Since it is my position/conclusion that I was referring to, them (supposedly) having evidence that I can't see doesn't help.

Quote:
Honestly, I don't care who or what you trust. You don't matter in the grand scheme of things. What matters is that this issue is thoroughly investigated by law enforcement, and that there are impeachment procedures against the incoming administration should it be shown that Trump or any of his staff in any way coordinated with the Russian hackers.
Yes, should it be shown.

'Shown' being the key word.

Quote:
ETA: I would also add that if there aren't congressional investigations into this, it is only because the GOP is too corrupt to investigate one of their own.
The fact you've already armed yourself with a convenient excuse that feeds your preexisting biases is wonderful.

Maybe read some of your more forceful claims of conspiracy mongering back while looking in a mirror.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 7th January 2017 at 04:20 PM.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 04:23 PM   #336
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,871
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
It's not so much that I didn't like it, it's that rather than supply a substantive response, you chose to wander off into judgmental excoriation and impugning motives (with your fantastic mind reader skillz!).
Doesn't take mind reading skills. It simply takes basic intelligence.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Yes, when you state that 'you can choose a or you can choose b' when c, d, e, f, g, and many other possibilities are available, that is a false dichotomy.
There are no other possibilities. You either accept it or you don't. Those are the only two available. If you don't, you have to make up a bunch of stuff in order to justify why, which is what you call 'speculation'.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Since it is my position/conclusion that I was referring to, them (supposedly) having evidence that I can't see doesn't help.
You said you had the same lack of evidence as they do (they being the CIA and FBI). They don't have a lack of evidence, so what you said was untrue.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Yes, should it be shown.

'Shown' being the key word.
Shown to people with appropriate security clearance.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
The fact you've already armed yourself with a convenient excuse that feeds your preexisting biases is wonderful.
Oh, give it a rest. We're dealing with the GOP here, who had how many investigations into Clinton's emails, and before them, Benghazi? The only reason this - a much more serious issue - would escape a congressional investigation would be because of partisanship, and you damn well know it.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 04:41 PM   #337
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Doesn't take mind reading skills. It simply takes basic intelligence.
Believing your ability to correctly deduce the motives of tens of millions of people is not a sign of intelligence. I'd call that hubris.

Quote:
There are no other possibilities. You either accept it or you don't. Those are the only two available. If you don't, you have to make up a bunch of stuff in order to justify why, which is what you call 'speculation'.
This was your original claim:
"You can then either chose to accept that the US intelligence agencies are actually doing their jobs, or you can concoct a conspiracy theory."

I gave you several other ways of arriving at various conclusions and I hold a position that is neither of the two which you describe, so obviously those two are not the only possibilities.

You can rephrase the original claim all you want, but continuing to insist that only two possibilities exist while simultaneously denying that doing so is a false dichotomy is only eroding your own credibility by revealing your intransigence and failure to be impartial.

Quote:
You said you had the same lack of evidence as they do (they being the CIA and FBI). They don't have a lack of evidence, so what you said was untrue.
"...but I have just the same lack of evidence as they do"

Refers to evidence being made available to bolster the claim.

What evidence do you have that there is more substantive evidence? Man, if I had a nickel for every time someone wanted me to believe them and believe that they have evidence to prove it...but can't show it to me...

Quote:
Shown to people with appropriate security clearance.
Doesn't mean they have a clue how to interpret it. We've had elected officials on the finance committees who think America is still backed by a gold standard. Plus, they make decisions based on polling data. Americans are whipped up about this and want 'something' done? They'll say "Aye" to whatever is put in front of them. Remember the bank bailouts?

Quote:
Oh, give it a rest. We're dealing with the GOP here, who had how many investigations into Clinton's emails, and before them, Benghazi? The only reason this - a much more serious issue - would escape a congressional investigation would be because of partisanship, and you damn well know it.
No, I don't. Just like with the whole 'Putin personally ordered hacking and ruining our elections' claim, I'll rate it as 'plausible, but not proven' and ask you what evidence you have. That you've already settled on this absolutely as the explanation for a decision that hasn't even been made yet does mark you as a biased source, however.
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 04:59 PM   #338
uke2se
Penultimate Amazing
 
uke2se's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 10,871
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Believing your ability to correctly deduce the motives of tens of millions of people is not a sign of intelligence. I'd call that hubris.
We don't have tens of millions of people posting in this thread, nor are there tens of millions of Trump sycophants.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
This was your original claim:
"You can then either chose to accept that the US intelligence agencies are actually doing their jobs, or you can concoct a conspiracy theory."

I gave you several other ways of arriving at various conclusions and I hold a position that is neither of the two which you describe, so obviously those two are not the only possibilities.

You can rephrase the original claim all you want, but continuing to insist that only two possibilities exist while simultaneously denying that doing so is a false dichotomy is only eroding your own credibility by revealing your intransigence and failure to be impartial.
Sure, if it'll make you feel better: You can either accept the conclusion of the US intelligence agencies, you can concoct a conspiracy theory, or you can speculate wildly for absolutely no reason.

Better?


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
"...but I have just the same lack of evidence as they do"

Refers to evidence being made available to bolster the claim.
Then you should have written that. You didn't. What you wrote was that they have a lack of evidence.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
What evidence do you have that there is more substantive evidence? Man, if I had a nickel for every time someone wanted me to believe them and believe that they have evidence to prove it...but can't show it to me...
More substantive evidence than what?


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Doesn't mean they have a clue how to interpret it. We've had elected officials on the finance committees who think America is still backed by a gold standard. Plus, they make decisions based on polling data. Americans are whipped up about this and want 'something' done? They'll say "Aye" to whatever is put in front of them. Remember the bank bailouts?
What do you say we simply stop accepting the opinions of experts?

This is getting ridiculous.


Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
No, I don't.
Yes, you do. If you don't, you're stupid, and you're not stupid.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Just like with the whole 'Putin personally ordered hacking and ruining our elections' claim,
Not what anyone's saying. We don't know Putin's involvement, and neither I expect does the CIA. Yet.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
I'll rate it as 'plausible, but not proven' and ask you what evidence you have.
You're asking the wrong person. The CIA has the evidence. Not me. And you aren't cleared to view it. Tough titties.

Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
That you've already settled on this absolutely as the explanation for a decision that hasn't even been made yet does mark you as a biased source, however.
You should take the time to read my posts. I said that if there isn't a congressional investigation, it's because of partisanship. I don't believe there will be, but I'm open to being surprised.
__________________
Before you say something stupid about climate change, check this list.

"If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. " Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies Vol. 1
uke2se is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 06:05 PM   #339
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,444
Originally Posted by zorro99 View Post
Mr Trump invited them to do so then insulted the intel community for pointing this out.
Can you link to the evidence that this happened? I may have missed some news, since I tuned out the noise during the election season about 30 days prior to the vote casting. It had gotten too nauseating.

Which sector of the intel community pointed this out?
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 06:50 PM   #340
sts60
Master Poster
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 2,650
Originally Posted by AlaskaBushPilot
This is the failed strategy of the losers in this election who spent $1.2 billion dollars and had every advantage of the media, establishment muscle etc. on their side and still lost.
Fox News, the Republican Party, the Koch Brothers, etc. were on Clinton's side?

You learn something new every day.
sts60 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 07:56 PM   #341
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,066
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
I don't buy this supposed skepticism about the CIA claims. The skeptical parties are for the most part either extreme left Putin sycophants, or extreme right Trumpistas - who, by the way, had no problem when the FBI head said there might be some emails on a computer somewhere. It's selective skepticism at the best of times, and is simply not credible.

For the rational people out there: we're not going to see the evidence, so we can simply stop speculating. Instead, it's a matter of trust. The US intelligence agencies, various bi-partisan senators and the POTUS or Donald "Pussygrabber" Trump and Vladimir Putin.
But the intelligence community is made up of a bunch of liberals appointed by Obama. (even those who have been working there for 20+ years). Someone needs to take Obama's time-machine away.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 08:06 PM   #342
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,578
Is there evidence yet?

We're 9 pages in and I still haven't seen evidence
__________________
Straw Man, Ad Hominem, Moving the Goalposts, and a massive post count are all good indicators that a poster is intellectually dishonest and not interested in real discussion.

Feeding trolls only makes them stronger, yet it is so hard to refrain.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 08:08 PM   #343
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,066
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Is there evidence yet?

We're 9 pages in and I still haven't seen evidence
All we have are conclusions from the intelligence community. They do not want to disclose the evidence to the public because it would hinder their lines of evidence-gathering. However, I think we can all agree that it is better to trust Trump and Breitbart on this, as they are more reliable sources on inforamation.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 08:15 PM   #344
The_Animus
Master Poster
 
The_Animus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,578
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
All we have are conclusions from the intelligence community. They do not want to disclose the evidence to the public because it would hinder their lines of evidence-gathering. However, I think we can all agree that it is better to trust Trump and Breitbart on this, as they are more reliable sources on inforamation.
As a skeptic I prefer evidence over blind trust of anyone. I know many here disagree.
__________________
Straw Man, Ad Hominem, Moving the Goalposts, and a massive post count are all good indicators that a poster is intellectually dishonest and not interested in real discussion.

Feeding trolls only makes them stronger, yet it is so hard to refrain.
The_Animus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 08:43 PM   #345
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,066
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
As a skeptic I prefer evidence over blind trust of anyone. I know many here disagree.
Is it blind trust? These are vetted, non-partisan organizations that also cross-check each other. There is also the fact that much of Russia's attempt to influence elections were out in the open. As a skeptic, I weigh the conclusions of the intelligence community over the conclusion of Trump and his conspiracy theorist colleagues. Also, I trust Obama because he has a history of being trustworthy.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 08:57 PM   #346
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,276
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Is it blind trust? These are vetted, non-partisan organizations
Certainly not vetted nor non partisan. They are more like police. They are simply not a credible assessor of facts.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:14 PM   #347
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Is it blind trust? These are vetted, non-partisan organizations that also cross-check each other. There is also the fact that much of Russia's attempt to influence elections were out in the open. As a skeptic, I weigh the conclusions of the intelligence community over the conclusion of Trump and his conspiracy theorist colleagues. Also, I trust Obama because he has a history of being trustworthy.
Hehehehe then the sound of howling laughter.

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
Health Care costs will go down for everyone.
There's not a smidgen of corruption in the faux IRS scandal.
The attack was the result of a protest, not a planned attack.
The line in the sand was only imaginary
Hillary did nothing wrong

Evidently, your definition of trustworthy is different from mine...
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:19 PM   #348
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
Is it blind trust? These are vetted, non-partisan organizations that also cross-check each other.
At some point in the past, I believe they were non-partisan, but not any more...
Vetted by whom?
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:23 PM   #349
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,276
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
Hehehehe then the sound of howling laughter.

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
True for over 98% of the population.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:32 PM   #350
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by The_Animus View Post
Is there evidence yet?
Nope. Well, interestingly enough, there is evidence in the thread that RT is providing better[*] coverage of it than the Washington Post. But to be fair, that's hardly a standard anyway.

* a strict superset along both the axes of amount of information and verifiability.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:34 PM   #351
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
They do not want to disclose the evidence to the public because it would hinder their lines of evidence-gathering.
Evidence?
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 09:35 PM   #352
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by thaiboxerken View Post
As a skeptic, I weigh the conclusions of the intelligence community over the conclusion of Trump and his conspiracy theorist colleagues.
You may be doing that, but how would you be doing that, specifically, as a skeptic? Especially since you even seem to fail to identify the conspiracy theory in the first place (hint: it's a theory which involves a conspiracy).
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 10:50 PM   #353
Delphic Oracle
Graduate Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 1,857
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
You may be doing that, but how would you be doing that, specifically, as a skeptic? Especially since you even seem to fail to identify the conspiracy theory in the first place (hint: it's a theory which involves a conspiracy).
I see a conspiracy theory in which anyone who doesn't uncritically accept the intelligence community's assertions is a Trump scyophant, Breitbart fan, conspiracy loon, 'speculating wildly', 'stupid', not 'rational', etc.

This is apparently another area in which I find a lot of emotional flak being thrown up at anything less than full and unconditional support for the party orthodoxy. What's funny to me is that I'm way off to the left of the political frame of the U.S., but my expressing some reservations apparently places me with 'them'.

In the Obama era, I've sometimes corrected people who identify me as liberal with a "well, not quite" and a bit of a grin. I'm quickly approaching the point where I want to scoff and say "not even close."
Delphic Oracle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th January 2017, 11:29 PM   #354
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by BobTheCoward View Post
True for over 98% of the population.
Evidence?
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 01:49 AM   #355
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,214
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
Hehehehe then the sound of howling laughter.

If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.
Health Care costs will go down for everyone.
There's not a smidgen of corruption in the faux IRS scandal.
The attack was the result of a protest, not a planned attack.
The line in the sand was only imaginary
Hillary did nothing wrong

Evidently, your definition of trustworthy is different from mine...
Evidently, my definition of a logical argument is different from yours, but I have a serious question: How do you personally "normalize" the fact that our next Commander in Chief is a sociopathic liar?
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 02:09 AM   #356
Reheat
Illuminator
 
Reheat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: In Space
Posts: 3,493
Originally Posted by WilliamSeger View Post
Evidently, my definition of a logical argument is different from yours, but I have a serious question: How do you personally "normalize" the fact that our next Commander in Chief is a sociopathic liar?
How bout, first you tell me when you stopped beating your wife.
__________________
[Noc]
Reheat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 02:11 AM   #357
thaiboxerken
Penultimate Amazing
 
thaiboxerken's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 28,066
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
How bout, first you tell me when you stopped beating your wife.
Trump lies on a very frequent basis, more so than any political figure in modern history. Carry on.
__________________
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power & profit - Thomas Paine
thaiboxerken is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 02:30 AM   #358
WilliamSeger
Master Poster
 
WilliamSeger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 2,214
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
How bout, first you tell me when you stopped beating your wife.
OK, I'll put you down as "denial," thanks. Can I ask another? How do you "normalize" the fact that the next Executive over the NSA, FBI, CIA, DoJ, etc. is obsessed with his own fragile ego and takes positive delight in revenge against the "enemies" who have injured it?
WilliamSeger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 05:56 AM   #359
BobTheCoward
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 9,276
Originally Posted by Reheat View Post
Evidence?
Here is a collection of estimates from the time

https://www.propublica.org/article/h...-and-dont-know

The most aggressive estimate is 80% of 14 million. 11 million/318 million people=3.4%. I went with a more middle estimate.

The reason so few people were affected as this primarily targeted the private insurance market. That was the smallest portion of the market.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th January 2017, 09:30 AM   #360
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,056
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
What's funny to me is that I'm way off to the left of the political frame of the U.S., but my expressing some reservations apparently places me with 'them'.
Their minds are too small to even conceive of politics which doesn't fit into the tiny bit of wiggle room between the moderate and far right that is called the "political spectrum" in the US.
__________________
"Ideas are also weapons." - Subcomandante Marcos
"We must devastate the avenues where the wealthy live." - Lucy Parsons
"Let us therefore trust the eternal Spirit which destroys and annihilates only because it is the unfathomable and eternal source of all life. The passion for destruction is a creative passion, too!" - Mikhail Bakunin
caveman1917 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.