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.
Reply
Old 10th August 2018, 01:10 PM   #81
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,774
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
But here's the thing: no one is saying that. You and a few other posters have this weird thing going on where you read a word or two in a post and make up the rest. Neither I nor anyone else is discounting racism. I am saying these LWB posts are awful examples of it. That's it. The extrapolations from that are only in your mind.

<snip>[/i]

I'm not claiming that cigarette smoking can't cause lung cancer.

I'm just saying that you can't prove it caused this lung cancer.

The forty year, three-pack-a-day habit isn't relevant.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 10th August 2018, 01:15 PM   #82
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,498
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
As opposed to his Paradox of Emotion, which was on the top ten electronic music charts for nineteen weeks. It's been remixed hundreds of times.
How did you get a song that doesn't exist stuck in my head?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 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 11th August 2018, 10:43 AM   #83
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Is it likely that he was a die hard racist, but that had nothing to do with the initial OP confrontation?

Which is the more extraordinary claim:

A die-hard racist verbally assaults a black person because she is black and doesn't believe she belongs in his neighborhood.

A die-hard racist verbally assaults a black person because she is on a motorcycle, he doesn't believe that motorcycles belong in his neighborhood, and neither notices nor cares that she's black despite demonstrating a clearly racist attitude.

Occams razor/parsimony principle, combined with many decades of data on racism and the behaviour of racists, means that the most likely explanation is that he verbally assaulted her primarily because she is black.

Quote:
You and others are conflating the larger issue of racism with the critical evaluation of the thread stories. They are separate issues.

No, they are really not. Critical evaluation in and of itself is neither here nor there, but like the incidents themselves, criticism does not take place in a vacuum. The mode and means of expressing that criticism is every bit as much a part of the issue as any other factor.

When contradictory contextual data is so off-handedly excluded without sufficient justification beyond a resort to atomization of the incidents taking them out of the wider cultural context, and eventualities are multiplied elaborately and unnecessarily in order to find some remotely possible, however improbable, as justification for denying what parsimony would cause one to accept, then that "critical evaluation" is as much a part of the discussion of the larger issue of racism as are the actions of the racist, because they are part of the larger cultural reaction to racism and reports of racism by the victims.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 11th August 2018, 11:13 AM   #84
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
No, they are really not. Critical evaluation in and of itself is neither here nor there, but like the incidents themselves, criticism does not take place in a vacuum. The mode and means of expressing that criticism is every bit as much a part of the issue as any other factor.

When contradictory contextual data is so off-handedly excluded without sufficient justification beyond a resort to atomization of the incidents taking them out of the wider cultural context, and eventualities are multiplied elaborately and unnecessarily in order to find some remotely possible, however improbable, as justification for denying what parsimony would cause one to accept, then that "critical evaluation" is as much a part of the discussion of the larger issue of racism as are the actions of the racist, because they are part of the larger cultural reaction to racism and reports of racism by the victims.
This is one of the points I was trying to make earlier, but I think you have articulated it better than I did.

Perhaps it could even be simplified into an expression: the amount of effort spent inventing hypothetical facts not in evidence to support the plausibility of non-racist intention, times the amount of effort spend inventing hypothetical reasons why direct evidence of racism may not be probative.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 11th August 2018 at 11:19 AM.
Checkmite 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 11th August 2018, 11:44 AM   #85
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 10,889
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Occams razor/parsimony principle, combined with many decades of data on racism and the behaviour of racists, means that the most likely explanation is that he verbally assaulted her primarily because she is black.
And secondarily because she is a she. I can't help but wonder how aggressive he'd have been with a black male motorcycle rider, who he might perceive as being a significant threat to his person.
Babbylonian 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 2018, 07:33 AM   #86
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
And secondarily because she is a she. I can't help but wonder how aggressive he'd have been with a black male motorcycle rider, who he might perceive as being a significant threat to his person.
Well, wonder no more. Nene Judge (the female rider) was not alone, she was with her husband the whole time, also on a bike.

Also, the racial slurs the twat spouted took place an hour and a half later, and over where the accident that caused Judge's detour took place. Is it fair to consider them two separate incidents?

She is also in fact a member of a MC crew, and her bike is tricked out with those LED lights, looks pretty wild at night. She claims herself on her facebook that 'he was even more mad that I was on a motorcycle', but that she only thinks she 'had a case of racist profiling' so I think that his rage towards her definitely had a lot to do with the bike.

https://www.necn.com/news/new-englan...490290901.html
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 2018, 08:12 AM   #87
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
This is one of the points I was trying to make earlier, but I think you have articulated it better than I did.

Perhaps it could even be simplified into an expression: the amount of effort spent inventing hypothetical facts not in evidence to support the plausibility of non-racist intention, times the amount of effort spend inventing hypothetical reasons why direct evidence of racism may not be probative.
Let's break that down:

What hypothetical facts not in evidence are presented? He starts shouting 'you bring these ***** bikes into my neighborhood' just a few seconds in to the OP video, and Judge comments herself that he was more mad about the bike. From this I conclude the bikes were an issue. You counter that an hour and a half later, he went over to the accident scene (the driver was armed, according to police) and tried to rip out the pole the driver hit while screaming slurs. Actually, you appear unaware that is was a freaking hour and a half later and blocks away.

So my facts are coming from the reporting. Yours ignore facts to try and tie the two incidents together. Thoughts?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 2018, 08:38 AM   #88
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Which is the more extraordinary claim:

A die-hard racist verbally assaults a black person because she is black and doesn't believe she belongs in his neighborhood.

A die-hard racist verbally assaults a black person because she is on a motorcycle, he doesn't believe that motorcycles belong in his neighborhood, and neither notices nor cares that she's black despite demonstrating a clearly racist attitude.

Occams razor/parsimony principle, combined with many decades of data on racism and the behaviour of racists, means that the most likely explanation is that he verbally assaulted her primarily because she is black.
Let me try:

Which is the more extraordinary claim:

A die hard racist verbally assaults a black person because he hates bikers and thinks they are bringing violence to 'his' neighborhood.

A die hard racist verbally assaults a black person because he hates bikers and thinks they are bringing violence to 'his' neighborhood, but also sees that they are black and despite being completely out of control to the point of making threats to damage the bike in front of a cop, yet maintains the presence of mind to not use any racial slurs and gives a convincing act of being only incensed by bikers in his neighborhood, a recent shooting, and fear of being shot. He keeps this bottled up for an hour and a half till he goes blocks away to the crime scene where he takes his racist hatred for Judge and her oddly silent husband out on the sign post that was hit by the armed motorist who caused the accident.

Whare's that Razor, again?

Quote:
No, they are really not. Critical evaluation in and of itself is neither here nor there, but like the incidents themselves, criticism does not take place in a vacuum. The mode and means of expressing that criticism is every bit as much a part of the issue as any other factor.

When contradictory contextual data is so off-handedly excluded without sufficient justification beyond a resort to atomization of the incidents taking them out of the wider cultural context, and eventualities are multiplied elaborately and unnecessarily in order to find some remotely possible, however improbable, as justification for denying what parsimony would cause one to accept, then that "critical evaluation" is as much a part of the discussion of the larger issue of racism as are the actions of the racist, because they are part of the larger cultural reaction to racism and reports of racism by the victims.
luchog, I get what you are saying. I really do. To some extent I am playing Devil's Advocate on these threads, but I think of it as Skeptic's Advocate. Some of these LWB threads are pretty clearly racially motivated (barring some unevidenced explanations like personal grudges). Some I think are kinda-sorta anecdotes that happened to be caught on video. I think fans of this second sort are SJW posturing and virtue signalling. The kid mowing the lawn, the barbequers...some of these really don't seem racially motivated, and I feel like they end up taking relataibility away from the experience of genuine drip by drip racism.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 2018, 12:07 PM   #89
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Let's break that down:

What hypothetical facts not in evidence are presented? He starts shouting 'you bring these ***** bikes into my neighborhood' just a few seconds in to the OP video, and Judge comments herself that he was more mad about the bike. From this I conclude the bikes were an issue. You counter that an hour and a half later, he went over to the accident scene (the driver was armed, according to police) and tried to rip out the pole the driver hit while screaming slurs. Actually, you appear unaware that is was a freaking hour and a half later and blocks away.

So my facts are coming from the reporting. Yours ignore facts to try and tie the two incidents together. Thoughts?
The reporting itself ties the two incidents together. The fact that the police announced to the press that they were considering hate crimes charges also means the police consider the cases linked; unless you think they're implying he may have committed a hate crime against the pole. It seems rather painfully obvious that when he was shouting "(f-word) that (n-word)" over and over again, "that (n-word)" is the black person he'd just been having an aneurysm over on video. It certainly could not have been the white police officer who had taken the black peoples' side against his tirade.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite 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 2018, 12:10 PM   #90
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Let me try:

Which is the more extraordinary claim:

A die hard racist verbally assaults a black person because he hates bikers and thinks they are bringing violence to 'his' neighborhood.

A die hard racist verbally assaults a black person because he hates bikers and thinks they are bringing violence to 'his' neighborhood, but also sees that they are black and despite being completely out of control to the point of making threats to damage the bike in front of a cop, yet maintains the presence of mind to not use any racial slurs and gives a convincing act of being only incensed by bikers in his neighborhood, a recent shooting, and fear of being shot.
Except he didn't maintain the presence of mind not to use any racial slurs, did he? Eventually, once the camera was gone, he was unable to help himself.

And his "act" wasn't convincing, was it? Without even having heard his f-wording-that-n-word aria, the black person who recorded him put the video online and identified him - correctly, it turns out - as racist. She was not "convinced" by his "act" for even a moment.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 12th August 2018 at 12:12 PM.
Checkmite 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 2018, 01:13 PM   #91
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The reporting itself ties the two incidents together. The fact that the police announced to the press that they were considering hate crimes charges also means the police consider the cases linked; unless you think they're implying he may have committed a hate crime against the pole. It seems rather painfully obvious that when he was shouting "(f-word) that (n-word)" over and over again, "that (n-word)" is the black person he'd just been having an aneurysm over on video. It certainly could not have been the white police officer who had taken the black peoples' side against his tirade.
Sheenan was at the scene of the accident with the armed driver, blocks away and an hour and a half later when he started screaming about the ***** n's f' ing up his property. What does his property have to do with Judge or her husband? Seems like a different rant to me. What race was the armed driver in the accident? I mean, you seem to dismiss that the second rant could have been directed at him, rather than Judge. You have a reason for that?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 12:45 AM   #92
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Sheenan was at the scene of the accident with the armed driver, blocks away and an hour and a half later when he started screaming about the ***** n's f' ing up his property. What does his property have to do with Judge or her husband? Seems like a different rant to me. What race was the armed driver in the accident? I mean, you seem to dismiss that the second rant could have been directed at him, rather than Judge. You have a reason for that?
The scene of the accident was only about one block away from where the confrontation with the motorcyclists took place. Sheehan was arrested on the same street - Adams Street - that he harassed the black motorcyclists on; and in fact, the police officer who is shown in the video ordering him to return home, is the same officer who later arrested him. That officer was on the scene directing traffic around the accident; he was working traffic at that scene both when he noticed Sheehan railing against the motorcylists and later when he noticed Sheehan railing against "that (n-word)". He would not have been "blocks away" from his assignment, to say nothing of the likelihood of randomly encountering Sheehan again in some far-off location.

Sheehan could not possibly have encountered the driver of the car that caused that accident, nor known what his race was, because that driver immediately fled the scene of the accident on foot and was quickly apprehended by following police officers elsewhere. Those events had already taken place, and a traffic detour set up around the accident scene, by the time Sheehan began harassing the motorcyclists. You're implying by your word choice that you think it would be unlikely for someone even as racist as Sheehan to still be angry enough at the motorcyclists to be screaming n-words about them "an hour and a half later", but your alternate scenario has him so angry about an incident that happened even longer ago than that.

But even assuming for argument's sake that he was enraged at some completely different and unrelated black person in the mean time, this objection goes nowhere. You have a guy who is racist enough to be banging on street signs and screaming "(f-word) that (n-word)" into the night sky repeatedly on a street corner over some random black person who wasn't even there anymore. I think the plausibility that he could, less than two hours earlier, be having another absolute barnburner at two other black people, almost incoherent with rage, and yet not giving any consideration to their race in that incident, is utterly negligible. Not a chance; that's not how racists work.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 13th August 2018 at 12:48 AM.
Checkmite 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 13th August 2018, 07:25 AM   #93
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
The scene of the accident was only about one block away from where the confrontation with the motorcyclists took place. Sheehan was arrested on the same street - Adams Street - that he harassed the black motorcyclists on; and in fact, the police officer who is shown in the video ordering him to return home, is the same officer who later arrested him. That officer was on the scene directing traffic around the accident; he was working traffic at that scene both when he noticed Sheehan railing against the motorcylists and later when he noticed Sheehan railing against "that (n-word)". He would not have been "blocks away" from his assignment, to say nothing of the likelihood of randomly encountering Sheehan again in some far-off location.

Sheehan could not possibly have encountered the driver of the car that caused that accident, nor known what his race was, because that driver immediately fled the scene of the accident on foot and was quickly apprehended by following police officers elsewhere. Those events had already taken place, and a traffic detour set up around the accident scene, by the time Sheehan began harassing the motorcyclists. You're implying by your word choice that you think it would be unlikely for someone even as racist as Sheehan to still be angry enough at the motorcyclists to be screaming n-words about them "an hour and a half later", but your alternate scenario has him so angry about an incident that happened even longer ago than that.
No. That is not what I am implying. You and others are implying that the slur-screaming was related to Judge. It happened an hour and a half later, and included rants about '******* his property'. As I asked earlier, what does his property evidently being ****** have to do with Judge? It seems to be a separate rant, and unless you can plausibly explain the property ******* angle, it should be treated as such. Hey, for all we know, he may have spent the intervening hour and a half ranting at a potted plant.

Quote:
But even assuming for argument's sake that he was enraged at some completely different and unrelated black person in the mean time, this objection goes nowhere. You have a guy who is racist enough to be banging on street signs and screaming "(f-word) that (n-word)" into the night sky repeatedly on a street corner over some random black person who wasn't even there anymore. I think the plausibility that he could, less than two hours earlier, be having another absolute barnburner at two other black people, almost incoherent with rage, and yet not giving any consideration to their race in that incident, is utterly negligible. Not a chance; that's not how racists work.
Ok. Viewing this event in the LWB frame, the claim is that this is an example of day to day racism that POC experience. Otherwise, there is no story here, right? Just a nut screaming.

I opine that this had to do with Sheehan being a loose cannon, and triggered by the bikes in his neighborhood, which he seems to associate with crime. He ranted specifically about the bikes in the video, as well as shootings. Judge herself responded to him saying 'I can ride my bike wherever I want', and that Sheenen was more mad about the bike, which I think suggests that the argument before the video started was specifically about bikes. Would you agree that this is a reasonable interpretation?

Was he also racist? Sure seems so. But racism need not fuel every thought and action, as you and others suggest. People have more than one dimension. He might, for instance, dislike blacks but really, really hate bikers and the trouble he thinks they bring.

You and others opine that it was racially motivated because he used slurs significantly later when referring to unrelated events (property damage), while apparently out of control with rage (trying to rip out street signs indicates having gone over the edge). Actually, the OP just assumed this motivation, as the later slurs were not included in the original reporting.

Is it fair to argue that since racism exists, and that in his later out-of-control rage, he used slurs, that his earlier screaming at Judge was racially motivated? I don't think so. What if his racist rantings were a day earlier, or a week later? Would you still assume the causal link?

Actually, just one question for you: You believe that Sheenan's dropping the n-bomb in his violent flip-out was connected to Judge. I believe it was unrelated because he screamed about ******* his property. How do you explain the property ranting having to do with Judge? If you can't, is it reasonable to assume they were unrelated, or does any racist language at any time prove motivation in your opinion?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 09:53 AM   #94
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,909
Or...

Racism is stupid, and the guy was acting like a complete idiot because of his racism.
Mumbles 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 13th August 2018, 10:21 AM   #95
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Or...

Racism is stupid, and the guy was acting like a complete idiot because of his racism.
More likely the other way around. He was racist because he is stupid. I think on balance, this story is an example of Living With Idiots more than Living While Black.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 10:29 AM   #96
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 16,077
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
More likely the other way around. He was racist because he is stupid. I think on balance, this story is an example of Living With Idiots more than Living While Black.
Maybe living with idiots is just a tad harder while black.

Especially as more and more of those idiots feel comfortable being racist.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is online now   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 13th August 2018, 10:43 AM   #97
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 5,909
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
More likely the other way around. He was racist because he is stupid. I think on balance, this story is an example of Living With Idiots more than Living While Black.
Nope, there are plenty of ordinarily intelligent racists around. This guy may or may not fall into that category.
Mumbles 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 13th August 2018, 10:47 AM   #98
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Maybe living with idiots is just a tad harder while black.

Especially as more and more of those idiots feel comfortable being racist.
Agreed, and I'm sure it's a lot harder. My argument is that some of these LWB stories are trying too hard to reflect that. Trying so hard at times that they shoot themselves in the foot trying to make any unpleasant interaction between a white and black person to be due to the white person's racism. As skeptics, shouldn't we not fall for that?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 10:51 AM   #99
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 16,077
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Agreed, and I'm sure it's a lot harder. My argument is that some of these LWB stories are trying too hard to reflect that. Trying so hard at times that they shoot themselves in the foot trying to make any unpleasant interaction between a white and black person to be due to the white person's racism. As skeptics, shouldn't we not fall for that?
I'm not sure what the highlighted means as it relates to this case.

If the guy turned out to not be a racist then you may have a point, but this case isn't that case.

Just to be clear: When a racist person treats a person of color poorly I don't feel the need to find out if they may have done so for non-racist reasons. That's one of the hazards of being openly racist.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is online now   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 13th August 2018, 10:56 AM   #100
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Mumbles View Post
Nope, there are plenty of ordinarily intelligent racists around. This guy may or may not fall into that category.
From the Commander-in-Chief to Sheehan, intellegence doesn't seem to be a defining trait. Would you consider an intelligent racist the exception or the rule?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 11:01 AM   #101
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
I'm not sure what the highlighted means as it relates to this case.

If the guy turned out to not be a racist then you may have a point, but this case isn't that case.

Just to be clear: When a racist person treats a person of color poorly I don't feel the need to find out if they may have done so for non-racist reasons. That's one of the hazards of being openly racist.
From the skeptical POV, I think it is important. Should someone who is racist have any word or action be interpreted through those screwed-up glasses? He may still act in ways not influenced by racism, as I interpret this OP. As skeptics, I think we should call things what they are, and not assume motivations because of a dislike for views they have.

Say someone is a flat-earther. Does that mean we can dismiss anything they do or say as wrong? Must their grammar also be incorrect because of their beliefs?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 12:06 PM   #102
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
No. That is not what I am implying. You and others are implying that the slur-screaming was related to Judge. It happened an hour and a half later, and included rants about '******* his property'. As I asked earlier, what does his property evidently being ****** have to do with Judge? It seems to be a separate rant, and unless you can plausibly explain the property ******* angle, it should be treated as such. Hey, for all we know, he may have spent the intervening hour and a half ranting at a potted plant.
I finally found an article with this quote about "property" that you keep mentioning. I think the article itself actually provides the connection that you're asking me to find. The segment regarding his arrest:

Quote:
According to police, about an hour and half after the incident, the officer noticed Sheehan walking up Adams Street repeatedly screaming, "F--- that n-----," and told him to stop.

Sheehan allegedly kept walking and then tried to pull down a traffic sign pole that was in the crime scene of the car crash, repeatedly screaming "the f------ animals f------ my property."
You will notice his reference to "the (f-wording) animals" being responsible for whatever is happening to his property. Sheehan refers to the black motorcyclists as "(f-wording) animals" in the viral video; and earlier in this same article it also quotes that portion of the video:

Quote:
"You f------ animals, shooting m-----f------ in my neighborhood," the suspect was heard repeatedly screaming by the officer. "I pay a mortgage, get the f--- out of my neighborhood, this is my f------ neighborhood."
So, easy question, easy answer. The "(f-wording) animals" are directly identified as the black motorcyclists by Sheehan himself on video, presuming them to have come to "shoot up his neighborhood". Since he was later screaming about "that (n-word)" during the same rant mentioning his property for which he was arrested, I'd say it's patently obvious his second rant was about the same black motorists he had been earlier screaming at, as personal proxies for the black people in general that he believes are ruining his neighborhood by bringing crime. In fact, I believe the facts we have in hand suggest this so strongly that there would be burden of proof on anyone proposing that there is another plausible explanation.

Now as for what he means by complaining about his property, I think process of elimination solves this one as well. According to the article, you initially misquoted him; he yells about the "(f-wording) animals (f-wording) my property", not (f-wording) up his property. It may seem pedantic, but I think it's actually crucial to the meaning of what he was saying - he's not talking about any kind of physical damage. Given his earlier ranting about his neighborhood, his mortgage, and how the black motorcyclists are "hurting us", I think the most likely explanation is that he believes his property's value is depreciating because of the perceived increase of crime and/or blacks in the area.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite 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 13th August 2018, 01:19 PM   #103
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Now as for what he means by complaining about his property, I think process of elimination solves this one as well. According to the article, you initially misquoted him; he yells about the "(f-wording) animals (f-wording) my property", not (f-wording) up his property. It may seem pedantic, but I think it's actually crucial to the meaning of what he was saying - he's not talking about any kind of physical damage. Given his earlier ranting about his neighborhood, his mortgage, and how the black motorcyclists are "hurting us", I think the most likely explanation is that he believes his property's value is depreciating because of the perceived increase of crime and/or blacks in the area.

Which, in my experience, is a very common attitude racists have toward minorities moving into what was previously an exclusively or predominantly white neighborhood. "Well, there goes the neighborhood" is a joke so old that nearly everyone forgets its racist origin. One of the justifications for "redlining" a neighborhood was to preserve property values, which would surely decline if too many undesirables moved in, ostensibly bringing violence and crime and loud music and so on. That's why the phenomenon of "white flight" was and is still a common problem with integration, and a large part of how de facto ghettos get created.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 13th August 2018, 02:00 PM   #104
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 16,077
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
From the skeptical POV, I think it is important. Should someone who is racist have any word or action be interpreted through those screwed-up glasses?
Yes. If an admitted racist is interacting with someone of another race I have no problem assuming the interaction will be influenced by their racism.

Quote:
He may still act in ways not influenced by racism, as I interpret this OP. As skeptics, I think we should call things what they are, and not assume motivations because of a dislike for views they have.
Not because of a dislike of their views, no. Because their views color any interaction they would have with someone of another race. That is the whole point of racism.

Quote:
Say someone is a flat-earther. Does that mean we can dismiss anything they do or say as wrong? Must their grammar also be incorrect because of their beliefs?
No, just anything they do or say that relates to the earth being spheroid versus flat.

Their grammar is another matter entirely.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is online now   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 13th August 2018, 03:06 PM   #105
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Yes. If an admitted racist is interacting with someone of another race I have no problem assuming the interaction will be influenced by their racism.

Not because of a dislike of their views, no. Because their views color any interaction they would have with someone of another race. That is the whole point of racism.

Indeed. In fact, I'd even say that to claim a racist is not influenced by his racism when interacting with a person of an "undesirable" race is an extraordinary claim in and of itself.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 13th August 2018, 03:28 PM   #106
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
I finally found an article with this quote about "property" that you keep mentioning. I think the article itself actually provides the connection that you're asking me to find. The segment regarding his arrest:
How hard was it really to find? I mean I have the same damn article linked in post #86, on this very page.

Quote:
You will notice his reference to "the (f-wording) animals" being responsible for whatever is happening to his property. Sheehan refers to the black motorcyclists as "(f-wording) animals" in the viral video; and earlier in this same article it also quotes that portion of the video:



So, easy question, easy answer. The "(f-wording) animals" are directly identified as the black motorcyclists by Sheehan himself on video, presuming them to have come to "shoot up his neighborhood". Since he was later screaming about "that (n-word)" during the same rant mentioning his property for which he was arrested, I'd say it's patently obvious his second rant was about the same black motorists he had been earlier screaming at, as personal proxies for the black people in general that he believes are ruining his neighborhood by bringing crime. In fact, I believe the facts we have in hand suggest this so strongly that there would be burden of proof on anyone proposing that there is another plausible explanation.

Now as for what he means by complaining about his property, I think process of elimination solves this one as well. According to the article, you initially misquoted him; he yells about the "(f-wording) animals (f-wording) my property", not (f-wording) up his property. It may seem pedantic, but I think it's actually crucial to the meaning of what he was saying - he's not talking about any kind of physical damage. Given his earlier ranting about his neighborhood, his mortgage, and how the black motorcyclists are "hurting us", I think the most likely explanation is that he believes his property's value is depreciating because of the perceived increase of crime and/or blacks in the area.
...

And with that Herculean contortion, I'm out. See ya on the next one.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 03:48 PM   #107
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Yes. If an admitted racist is interacting with someone of another race I have no problem assuming the interaction will be influenced by their racism.
Why? Their thoughts might be influenced, but do their actions and words have to be? You actually think it's not possible for someone who harbors racist thoughts to behave normally, at least outwardly?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 04:03 PM   #108
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,774
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Why? Their thoughts might be influenced, but do their actions and words have to be? You actually think it's not possible for someone who harbors racist thoughts to behave normally, at least outwardly?

Are you suggesting that Mr."Do you live here? This is my ******* neighborhood!" Sheehan was behaving normally?

Outwardly or otherwise?

Your perception of normal is vastly different from mine. Maybe even from what most normal people would consider to be normal.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep."
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing had happened."
quadraginta 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 13th August 2018, 04:08 PM   #109
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Why? Their thoughts might be influenced, but do their actions and words have to be? You actually think it's not possible for someone who harbors racist thoughts to behave normally, at least outwardly?

Define "normally".

It's possible for people who are racists to consciously act like non-racists in settings where they believe that there will be significant negative consequences for acting on their racism, but remove that pressure and their true colours will inevitably shine through. We can see that now with the rise in overt expressions of racism in the US with the stigma greatly reduced by the election of an openly racist president.

And as has been stated so many times in this and other threads, which you have been persistently resistant to, is that racists can express their racism in very subtle, plausibly deniable ways. Racism colours their actions in ways that those who aren't constantly the targets of said racism find easy to ignore or explain away.

So no, I don't think racists are able to behave "normally" so long as they hold racist views. At best, they'll make an effort to act within cultural norms if they think doing so will benefit them, or not doing so will have negative repercussions; but they will in no way simply forget to be racist.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 13th August 2018, 05:37 PM   #110
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
And with that Herculean contortion, I'm out. See ya on the next one.
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Which, in my experience, is a very common attitude racists have toward minorities moving into what was previously an exclusively or predominantly white neighborhood. "Well, there goes the neighborhood" is a joke so old that nearly everyone forgets its racist origin. One of the justifications for "redlining" a neighborhood was to preserve property values, which would surely decline if too many undesirables moved in, ostensibly bringing violence and crime and loud music and so on. That's why the phenomenon of "white flight" was and is still a common problem with integration, and a large part of how de facto ghettos get created.
Exactly. You'd have to be completely detached from the cultural history of white racism against black Americans to think that white people blaming blacks for driving down property values and "ruining" neighborhoods is some kind of fictitious construct made up for an internet argument.

Talking about increasing crime and falling property values was one of the very earliest "dogwhistles" and its use is prolific today. In like manner, find an almost exclusively white neighborhood in an otherwise diverse town whose school is considering a policy that would result in some non-white students having access to that school. You will see PETA and city council meetings packed with concerned parents decrying that the school's quality and thus their children's education will be negatively impacted - heavily implied (without being stated out loud of course) simply as a result of any number of non-white children now being present.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002
Checkmite 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 13th August 2018, 07:26 PM   #111
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Define "normally".
In context, in a manner uninfluenced by someone else's skin color.

Quote:
It's possible for people who are racists to consciously act like non-racists in settings where they believe that there will be significant negative consequences for acting on their racism, but remove that pressure and their true colours will inevitably shine through. We can see that now with the rise in overt expressions of racism in the US with the stigma greatly reduced by the election of an openly racist president.
I agree. But are you assuming that all racists harbor the same levels of racism? Is the guy who is just a little uneasy around POC influenced the same way as a swastika tattooed white supremacist? You think there is no spectrum at all?

Quote:
And as has been stated so many times in this and other threads, which you have been persistently resistant to, is that racists can express their racism in very subtle, plausibly deniable ways. Racism colours their actions in ways that those who aren't constantly the targets of said racism find easy to ignore or explain away.
Simply untrue. I have offered anecdotes of my own that I think show subtle racism much more clearly, such as a white guy in a convenience store getting a warm greeting and small talk, and the black guy next to him getting a cold '$1.81'. Too subtle to even say something about without seeming petty, which must be extra frustrating. That was not a random example, btw. It was me and a sparring partner from a school I used to train at.

Quote:
So no, I don't think racists are able to behave "normally" so long as they hold racist views. At best, they'll make an effort to act within cultural norms if they think doing so will benefit them, or not doing so will have negative repercussions; but they will in no way simply forget to be racist.
Ok, fair enough. But as I asked before, do you allow that there may be people who are only uncomfortable around POC, and a scale moving out towards hostile? Or do you think that racism starts with overt hostility?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 07:31 PM   #112
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
Exactly. You'd have to be completely detached from the cultural history of white racism against black Americans to think that white people blaming blacks for driving down property values and "ruining" neighborhoods is some kind of fictitious construct made up for an internet argument.

Talking about increasing crime and falling property values was one of the very earliest "dogwhistles" and its use is prolific today. In like manner, find an almost exclusively white neighborhood in an otherwise diverse town whose school is considering a policy that would result in some non-white students having access to that school. You will see PETA and city council meetings packed with concerned parents decrying that the school's quality and thus their children's education will be negatively impacted - heavily implied (without being stated out loud of course) simply as a result of any number of non-white children now being present.
Come on, dude. You are claiming that this raving loon who is trying to rip poles out of the ground is concerned about the potential devaluation of his real estate portfolio? You just criticized me for presenting hypothetical facts not in evidence a few freaking posts ago (which you of course did not cite) and now you come up with this?

eta: oh, that hilighted: wut?
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907

Last edited by Thermal; 13th August 2018 at 08:33 PM.
Thermal 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 13th August 2018, 08:20 PM   #113
Checkmite
Skepticifimisticalationist
 
Checkmite's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Gulf Coast
Posts: 22,095
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Come on, dude. You are claiming that this raving loon who is trying to rip poles out of the ground is concerned about the potential devaluation of his real estate portfolio?
No, not really; no more than he was truly concerned about motorcycles, or truly worried about either of the motorcyclists ever actually shooting him. All of these things are nothing more than shallow but convenient excuses to yell at black people to get out of your neighborhood. I don't know how many more times I must reiterate this, or how much clearer I can make it. His complaint about the motorcyclists "shooting up the neighborhood", was BS. His complaint that their existence somehow effects his mortgage, or his property, was also BS. His only real problem with them was that they were black.
__________________
"¿WHAT KIND OF BIRD?
¿A PARANORMAL BIRD?"
--- Carlos S., 2002

Last edited by Checkmite; 13th August 2018 at 08:23 PM.
Checkmite 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 13th August 2018, 08:35 PM   #114
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
No, not really; no more than he was truly concerned about motorcycles, or truly worried about either of the motorcyclists ever actually shooting him. All of these things are nothing more than shallow but convenient excuses to yell at black people to get out of your neighborhood. I don't know how many more times I must reiterate this, or how much clearer I can make it. His complaint about the motorcyclists "shooting up the neighborhood", was BS. His complaint that their existence somehow effects his mortgage, or his property, was also BS. His only real problem with them was that they were black.
And I think he was a loon. Hopefully we can at least agree on that.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 Yesterday, 02:58 AM   #115
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,802
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
But here's the thing: no one is saying that.
No they are not saying it, they are just doing it. By discounting the everyday racism as you consistently do in these threads that is exactly what you are doing. You are just not saying it.
__________________
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 online now   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 Yesterday, 03:03 AM   #116
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,802
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I'm not claiming that cigarette smoking can't cause lung cancer.

I'm just saying that you can't prove it caused this lung cancer.

The forty year, three-pack-a-day habit isn't relevant.
And what is the specific harm in this specific cigarette? Why I have had nasty events of smoke myself despite being a non smoker so why say this cigarette is bad?
__________________
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 online now   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 Yesterday, 06:49 AM   #117
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
Come on, dude. You are claiming that this raving loon who is trying to rip poles out of the ground is concerned about the potential devaluation of his real estate portfolio? You just criticized me for presenting hypothetical facts not in evidence a few freaking posts ago (which you of course did not cite) and now you come up with this?

Since you've clearly missed any shred of history lesson on the subject of American racial relationships, and as noted earlier, "property values" is one of the oldest and most pervasive dog whistles for racists, as is "crime rates increasing".

Quote:
eta: oh, that hilighted: wut?

It's clearly a typo for PTA, aka, Parent Teacher Association.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 Yesterday, 07:25 AM   #118
Thermal
Illuminator
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 3,682
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
Since you've clearly missed any shred of history lesson on the subject of American racial relationships, and as noted earlier, "property values" is one of the oldest and most pervasive dog whistles for racists, as is "crime rates increasing".
Yes. I know. We all know. But yet again, that was not the subject at hand. When asked to interpret 'f****** my property' while tearing up signposts, it is beyond all reason to opine that by process of freaking elimination, Sheehan was lamenting perceived depreciation to his landholdings. Especially after just accusing me of contriving hypothetical facts to fit a narrative. Followed by a 'but not really'. Seriously, this is too absurd to continue.

Quote:
It's clearly a typo for PTA, aka, Parent Teacher Association.
Yes. I know. We all know. Hence 'wut?' instead of a serious query for explanation. You see, the image of PETA attending a meeting...

Never mind.
__________________
I am looking for other websites; you suck. -banned buttercake aficionado yuno44907
Thermal 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 Yesterday, 09:04 AM   #119
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
When asked to interpret 'f****** my property' while tearing up signposts, it is beyond all reason to opine that by process of freaking elimination, Sheehan was lamenting perceived depreciation to his landholdings.

Good thing no one actually said that, except you.

Quote:
Especially after just accusing me of contriving hypothetical facts to fit a narrative. Followed by a 'but not really'. Seriously, this is too absurd to continue.

If you'd stop creating these bizarre straw men and actually pay attention to what is being said, you'd find the discussion much easier to follow.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is online now   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 09:16 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, 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.