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

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


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 assault incidents , Montana incidents , national anthem incidents

Reply
Old 9th August 2019, 04:17 AM   #81
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,331
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
If evidence surfaces that Trump is directly responsible for X, then I'll happily accept that as fact (have you seen me doing otherwise?). If said evidence is supplied in advance the rule cannot and will not be applied.

No, Trump didn't shoot those people in El Paso.
Now show us somebody who claimed that he did.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 9th August 2019, 04:41 AM   #82
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by dann View Post
No, Trump didn't shoot those people in El Paso.
Now show us somebody who claimed that he did.
I never, ever, ever said or even hinted that he did, nor did I ever, ever, not even once suggest that somebody says he did. This thread is not about El Paso, what a bizarre retort.

Did you read the section you quoted? Are you sure it's me you are responding to? Are you even in the right thread?

I'm not here to defend Trump nor am I here to vilify him but whenever I see Trumps name mentioned in a thread as a contributing factor, sans evidence, for whatever, I'm gonna apply my rule to show this inane, paranoid and irrational reasoning for what it is.

Why should that bother you?

Last edited by bluesjnr; 9th August 2019 at 04:45 AM.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 04:48 AM   #83
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,447
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
I'm not here to defend Trump nor am I here to vilify him but whenever I see Trumps name mentioned in a thread as a contributing factor, sans evidence, for whatever, I'm gonna apply my rule to show this inane, paranoid and irrational reasoning for what it is.
Well, there's the rub. Are Trump's actual words admissible as evidence? Are striking similarities between Trump's statements and those of the perpetrators of an act admissible as evidence? I would argue yes to both; weak evidence, to be sure, but evidence nonetheless, and enough to make it reasonable to consider the possibility that the relationship is other than a coincidental one. And, in this case, as it turns out, there is an actual connection being claimed.

This is somewhat reminiscent of the Jussie Smollett thread, in which those who initially felt there was something wrong with Smollett's story were promptly accused of defending racism, even after the story developed to the point where, at best, his story was gravely in doubt. Would you side with those accusers, or would you admit that those they accused actually had a point? And if the latter, would you take an analogous stance in this instance?

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers 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 9th August 2019, 05:15 AM   #84
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,331
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
I never, ever, ever said or even hinted that he did, nor did I ever, ever, not even once suggest that somebody says he did. This thread is not about El Paso, what a bizarre retort.

Did you read the section you quoted? Are you sure it's me you are responding to? Are you even in the right thread?

I'm not here to defend Trump nor am I here to vilify him but whenever I see Trumps name mentioned in a thread as a contributing factor, sans evidence, for whatever, I'm gonna apply my rule to show this inane, paranoid and irrational reasoning for what it is.

Why should that bother you?

I didn't change any words in the quotation, but I highlighted two of them, so I'm pretty sure that I'm responding to you and doing so in the right thread.
However, I could have been more clear so let me elaborate a little. When I said:

Quote:
No, Trump didn't shoot those people in El Paso.
Now show us somebody who claimed that he did.

I should probably have added:

Quote:
No, Trump didn't shoot those people in El Paso.
Nor did he directly order the shooter to do so.
Now show us somebody who claimed that he did.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann 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 9th August 2019, 05:21 AM   #85
Jungle Jim
Graduate Poster
 
Jungle Jim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 1,090
Originally Posted by ArchSas View Post
Probably this. It's essentially the same thing the MAGAbomber's lawyer used as a defense, and it worked well enough.
I suppose that depends on your definition of "worked well enough."

MAGA Mail Bomber Cesar Sayoc Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison
https://www.thedailybeast.com/maga-m...ears-in-prison
Jungle Jim 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 9th August 2019, 05:38 AM   #86
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Well, there's the rub. Are Trump's actual words admissible as evidence? Are striking similarities between Trump's statements and those of the perpetrators of an act admissible as evidence? I would argue yes to both; weak evidence, to be sure, but evidence nonetheless, and enough to make it reasonable to consider the possibility that the relationship is other than a coincidental one. And, in this case, as it turns out, there is an actual connection being claimed.

This is somewhat reminiscent of the Jussie Smollett thread, in which those who initially felt there was something wrong with Smollett's story were promptly accused of defending racism, even after the story developed to the point where, at best, his story was gravely in doubt. Would you side with those accusers, or would you admit that those they accused actually had a point? And if the latter, would you take an analogous stance in this instance?

Dave
No I wouldn't side with those accusers and yes those they accused had a point (we're sceptics after all). My stance right now, in this thread, is that it passed the Bluesjnrs Rule which has nothing to do with racism. I can't help you past that.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 05:39 AM   #87
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by dann View Post
I didn't change any words in the quotation, but I highlighted two of them, so I'm pretty sure that I'm responding to you and doing so in the right thread.
However, I could have been more clear so let me elaborate a little. When I said:




I should probably have added:
Thank you for the clarification but I'm still utterly flummoxed as to why you're pointing this out to me and why you think that I think you changed some words in the quotation?

Last edited by bluesjnr; 9th August 2019 at 05:40 AM.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 05:47 AM   #88
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,447
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
My stance right now, in this thread, is that it passed the Bluesjnrs Rule which has nothing to do with racism. I can't help you past that.
It seems to me, then that the Bluesjnrs rule is not in any way related to whether or not a surmise that President Trump is related to an incident is reasonable, and could therefore be equally well invoked by someone suggesting President Trump is responsible for something that he later turns out to have been directly responsible for, so long as the level of evidence at the time of the suggestion fails to meet your own standard for persuasiveness. Would you agree to that interpretation of the rule?

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers 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 9th August 2019, 05:58 AM   #89
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
It seems to me, then that the Bluesjnrs rule is not in any way related to whether or not a surmise that President Trump is related to an incident is reasonable, and could therefore be equally well invoked by someone suggesting President Trump is responsible for something that he later turns out to have been directly responsible for, so long as the level of evidence at the time of the suggestion fails to meet your own standard for persuasiveness. Would you agree to that interpretation of the rule?

Dave
Absolutely maybe, depending on my mood.

It's early days and we've got to start somewhere but, going forward, the team are on the look out for the more egregious instances of "Trumping" a thread.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 06:04 AM   #90
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,447
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
It's early days and we've got to start somewhere but, going forward, the team are on the look out for the more egregious instances of "Trumping" a thread.
If I were you, I would start by looking in the threads that discuss Trump's own actions. After all, there seems little evidence that he's responsible for them.

Dave
__________________
Inspiring discussion of Sharknado is not a good sign for the audience expectations of your new high-concept SF movie sequel.

- Myriad
Dave Rogers 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 9th August 2019, 06:08 AM   #91
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 5,970
Originally Posted by bluesjnr View Post
I win.
Does Danth's Law trump bluesjnr's rule?
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 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 9th August 2019, 06:17 AM   #92
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
Does Danth's Law trump bluesjnr's rule?
Well played.

We're under advisement regarding that currently.

Last edited by bluesjnr; 9th August 2019 at 06:19 AM.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 06:19 AM   #93
bluesjnr
Professional Nemesis for Hire
 
bluesjnr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Not where I should be.
Posts: 6,548
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
If I were you, I would start by looking in the threads that discuss Trump's own actions. After all, there seems little evidence that he's responsible for them.

Dave
One can't "Trump" a thread about Trump. That is a cardinal rule.

Anyhoooos enough of this! It's time to get back to the story, my work on this thread is done.
bluesjnr 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 9th August 2019, 06:35 AM   #94
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 20,696
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
Well, these days when I think of the American Flag I do usually think of violent criminal trash.
They do seem inexorably linked these days.


Obviously the kid should have been armed and shot his attacker. Simples.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate 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 9th August 2019, 09:37 AM   #95
ArchSas
Thinker
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 145
Originally Posted by Jungle Jim View Post
I suppose that depends on your definition of "worked well enough."

MAGA Mail Bomber Cesar Sayoc Sentenced to 20 Years in Prison
https://www.thedailybeast.com/maga-m...ears-in-prison
Well, as I've seen from other articles on the sentencing, it seems like the judge didn't think a harsh sentence would be appropriate due to Sayoc's mental issues, as demonstrated by his defense. Part of that included arguing that he was obviously ill, as he thought the president was telling him it was okay to send bombs to people. The 20-year sentence was a compromise between the mandatory minimum, which the judge said wasn't enough, and the life sentence initially requested by the prosecution. So yeah, I think that counts as working "well enough" - I know Sayoc got a 20 year sentence, I don't think I was implying he was acquitted or anything, I was just noting that the defense contributed to him getting a lighter sentence.

That's just my opinion, of course. I also think that if the judge decided Sayoc was that mentally unwell, he probably shouldn't even have sent him to prison in the first place. Prisons shouldn't be considered a valid means of dealing with serious mental illness.
ArchSas 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 12th August 2019, 12:36 PM   #96
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,170
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Of course not, since the song take place in Baltimore, and we all know what Trump thinks of Baltimore.
I think he would like the third verse though no one ever bothers with any after the first. That has rebellious slaves thinking they could win their freedom by fighting for the British getting what they deserve.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 14th August 2019, 11:42 AM   #97
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by ArchSas View Post
Well, as I've seen from other articles on the sentencing, it seems like the judge didn't think a harsh sentence would be appropriate due to Sayoc's mental issues, as demonstrated by his defense. Part of that included arguing that he was obviously ill, as he thought the president was telling him it was okay to send bombs to people. The 20-year sentence was a compromise between the mandatory minimum, which the judge said wasn't enough, and the life sentence initially requested by the prosecution. So yeah, I think that counts as working "well enough" - I know Sayoc got a 20 year sentence, I don't think I was implying he was acquitted or anything, I was just noting that the defense contributed to him getting a lighter sentence.

That's just my opinion, of course. I also think that if the judge decided Sayoc was that mentally unwell, he probably shouldn't even have sent him to prison in the first place. Prisons shouldn't be considered a valid means of dealing with serious mental illness.
Right or wrong, mental illness is not necessarily a get out of jail free card in the US. Yes, there is an insanity defense, but that has a pretty narrow legal definition (unable to distinguish right from wrong) that doesn't encompass all mental illness. For some crimes there is also a "diminished capacity" defense, which may result in conviction of a lesser charge, or a lesser sentence.
CORed 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 14th August 2019, 11:44 AM   #98
CORed
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Central City, Colorado, USA
Posts: 8,928
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
I think he would like the third verse though no one ever bothers with any after the first. That has rebellious slaves thinking they could win their freedom by fighting for the British getting what they deserve.
Well that is certainly one interpretation of the phrase "hireling and slave", and quite possibly correct. I'm not sure if Francis Scott Key ever explained what he meant by it, and it's much too late to ask him now.

Last edited by CORed; 14th August 2019 at 11:49 AM.
CORed 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 14th August 2019, 12:41 PM   #99
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 47,170
Originally Posted by CORed View Post
Well that is certainly one interpretation of the phrase "hireling and slave", and quite possibly correct. I'm not sure if Francis Scott Key ever explained what he meant by it, and it's much too late to ask him now.
And fits into the history of the battle in question.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle 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 » Social Issues & Current Events

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 12:14 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

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.