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 media criticism

Reply
Old 16th December 2016, 08:56 AM   #361
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Good question, what have you got?
That's not a question for you to dismiss. If you can't answer it, it indicates nothing would satisfy your objection and therefore your objection is meaningless.
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 09:15 AM   #362
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,571
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Define "is".
Originally Posted by marplots View Post
Define "define."
I hope you don't dismiss these posts caveman1917. They say something about your approach to this discussion

A source like the NYT that has published countless news stories over a period of decades is going to have blemishes. It's impossible not to. Instead of cherry-picking those blemishes, how about we monitor the NYT going forward, alongside the abject garbage source that you won't concede is abject garbage?

If you're game, let's hash out a few ground rules. What do you say?
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 16th December 2016, 09:44 AM   #363
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
Confirms it, site is good for checking bias. Passed it on to friends and family. Thanks for the validation!
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
Yup. Caveman and CE saying something is wrong is fairly strong evidence for it being right.
It promotes crackpots and an assortment of right-wing "think tanks" (Atlantic Council, Carnegie Institute, ...). Figures the two of you would like it.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 10:04 AM   #364
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
That's not a question for you to dismiss.
It is up to the claimant to support their claim with evidence. It is not up to me to design a study to test the claim. And I can most definitely ask about what evidence someone has available to support their claims with.

Quote:
If you can't answer it, it indicates nothing would satisfy your objection and therefore your objection is meaningless.
No it doesn't.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 10:10 AM   #365
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I hope you don't dismiss these posts caveman1917.
Of course I'm dismissing silly diversion attempts.

Quote:
They say something about your approach to this discussion
My approach to this discussion has been to provide evidence for my claims. My interlocutor's approach has been to make claims, refuse to define their terms, and refuse to provide evidence to support their claims.

Quote:
A source like the NYT that has published countless news stories over a period of decades is going to have blemishes. It's impossible not to. Instead of cherry-picking those blemishes, how about we monitor the NYT going forward, alongside the abject garbage source that you won't concede is abject garbage?

If you're game, let's hash out a few ground rules. What do you say?
I say no. I'm not responsible for supporting your claims. If you are still in need of gathering the required data in support of your claim then gather it and come back when you have it. While you're at it you might also ponder the notion that conclusions are supposed to be derived from data, not asserted beforehand and then data being sought to fit it.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 10:50 AM   #366
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,763
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
...Citations of the NYT stating falsehoods are contained in post 411 and post 422.
Post #411: Chompsky's opinion from Alternet reposted in Slate was no surprise but that's more opinion than evidence. As for the other link, all the major news media outlets from Fox News to MSNBC failed the American Public in the run up to the Iraq War. See Bill Moyers' Buying the War for an excellent review of the complete failure of the mainstream news media to hold Bush et al accountable.

I don't see any links in post #422.

The Times enjoys the reputation of being a generally reliable source of news.
Skeptic Ginger 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 16th December 2016, 11:16 AM   #367
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Post #411: Chompsky's opinion from Alternet reposted in Slate was no surprise but that's more opinion than evidence.
It's more than just opinion, it's evidence of the NYT printing falsehoods about US military intervention in and around Vietnam. As you can see the falsehoods are stated so as to directly support American foreign interests.

Quote:
As for the other link, all the major news media outlets from Fox News to MSNBC failed the American Public in the run up to the Iraq War.
That your major news media outlets are generally in such a deplorable state does not vindicate the NYT. Again we have the NYT printing falsehoods in direct support of American foreign interests.

Quote:
I don't see any links in post #422.
You can notice the link by it being underlined. In short, it contains evidence of the NYT printing pseudo-scientific claims regarding the production of certain nerve agents and rocket capabilities. Again falsehoods in support of American foreign interests. Are you noticing a certain theme here already?

Quote:
I'm sure you can also find people who think that Breitbart has a reputation of being a generally reliable source, this means nothing.

Checking even just a couple major American interventions (Vietnam, Iraq & Syria) we find the NYT printing falsehoods, unsupported conspiracy theories and pseudo-science in direct support of American foreign interests. All you've got so far is effectively "look, there's someone saying it's reliable".
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 11:21 AM   #368
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 68,642
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Of course I'm dismissing silly diversion attempts.
I think you just broke my irony meter.
__________________
渦巻く暗雲天を殺し 現る凶事のうなりか

Argumemnon 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 16th December 2016, 11:47 AM   #369
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
I think you just broke my irony meter.
There is no irony. I challenged someone to define "conspiracy theory" and "legitimate" because it was patently obvious that this person was using those terms in a slanted way.

The media which you (generic you) define as "legitimate" is overflowing with unsupported conspiracy theories, such as "Saddam has WMDs", "Khadaffi was giving his troops viagra to rape civilians", "Assad used chemical weapons on East Ghouta", "Putin is using cyber warfare to influence our elections", "Putin has a troll factory in some building in St Petersburg", etc etc etc.

So I understand why you'd want to divert attention from the definition of "conspiracy theory" and refuse to define the term. At best it means absolutely nothing, at worst it means "Western people are ubermenschen and non-Western people are untermenschen".

Likely it was used with the latter meaning, given that "the US government is giving viagra to soldiers to rape civilians" would count as a "conspiracy theory" (ie to be rejected because it claims wrongdoing on the part of ubermenschen without evidence) whereas "the Libyan government is giving viagra to soldiers to rape civilians" would not count as a "conspiracy theory" (ie to be accepted because it claims wrongdoing on the part of untermenschen without evidence).

Which leads us to the definition of "legitimate" - which is likely going to be: a source is "legitimate" if the conspiracy theories it prints uphold the notion that Western people are ubermenschen and non-Western people are untermenschen, and it is not "legitimate" if the conspiracy theories it prints do not uphold that notion.

So yes, I fully understand your desire to leave these terms undefined and divert attention from a request to define them.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 11:52 AM   #370
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,763
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It's more than just opinion, it's evidence of the NYT printing falsehoods about US military intervention in and around Vietnam. As you can see the falsehoods are stated so as to directly support American foreign interests. [snip]
Remind me again what your initial complaint was about. You can find erroneous stories in any news source. The issue is, do they make an effort to vet their stories or do they regularly put out fake news in an effort at manipulating belief?

As for SourceWatch, they are a news media watchdog as well as a source you can go to to find out who is financially supporting most astro-turf and related organizations. It's a more thorough validator that Chompsky's anti-war opinion (which by the way I am not in disagreement with, I just don't think that invalidates the NYTs as a news source).
Skeptic Ginger 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 16th December 2016, 11:56 AM   #371
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,571
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I say no. I'm not responsible for supporting your claims. If you are still in need of gathering the required data in support of your claim then gather it and come back when you have it. While you're at it you might also ponder the notion that conclusions are supposed to be derived from data, not asserted beforehand and then data being sought to fit it.
I've proposed an experiment to test our opinions, and your evasion is duly noted. I'm left with the distinct impression that you're not interested in getting at the truth.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 16th December 2016, 12:32 PM   #372
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Remind me again what your initial complaint was about.
The NYT was being claimed to be "reliable".

Quote:
You can find erroneous stories in any news source. The issue is, do they make an effort to vet their stories or do they regularly put out fake news in an effort at manipulating belief?
Well even in this short overview we've established some sort of regularity already, specifically the output of fake news in support of discourse underlying American foreign interests, specifically the discourse surrounding foreign military interventions.

Quote:
As for SourceWatch, they are a news media watchdog
Which means nothing. I noticed for example that your SourceWatch article didn't reference any science-based sources (such as reviewed studies etc).

What it does spend effort on, however, is a bunch of claims by their Ombuds. One of them being this:
Originally Posted by NYT Ombuds
But in the Times's WMD coverage, readers encountered some rather breathless stories built on unsubstantiated 'revelations' that, in many instances, were the anonymity-cloaked assertions of people with vested interests.
Let's juxtapose that statement with ongoing practice at the NYT. All this shows is that, when caught, the NYT will issue an apology and mea culpa before continuing the exact same practice.

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger
It's a more thorough validator that Chompsky's anti-war opinion
No it isn't, it's not a validator at all. It's just someone claiming "the NYT is reliable".
__________________
"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; 16th December 2016 at 12:38 PM.
caveman1917 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 16th December 2016, 12:38 PM   #373
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
I've proposed an experiment to test our opinions, and your evasion is duly noted.
My opinion needs no testing, because my opinion is zero-information (the fact that a claim is made by a certain NYT journalist does not change its reliability relative to a claim being made by any random person).

Quote:
I'm left with the distinct impression that you're not interested in getting at the truth.
That's like you claiming Bigfoot exists, me saying that I don't know whether Bigfoot exists, you then suggesting we take a trip into the woods to "test our opinions" and upon my refusal claiming that I'm "not interested in getting at the truth".

It's very simple, if you make a claim then it is up to you to support it. And since you apparently haven't even acquired the data yet to support your claim with, I am left with the distinct impression that you're putting the cart before the horse in terms of "data implying conclusion".
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 12:45 PM   #374
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,763
So caveman, you hand wave off SourceWatch and you claim that over 4 decades a handful of reporting errors makes the NYTs an unreliable source.

I'm not impressed. Back to the thread topic, "Fake news is a threat to democracy," I don't see the NYTs as being a significant part of that problem. Your position the NYT isn't a reliable source is duly noted, and not all that important to this discussion.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 16th December 2016 at 12:46 PM.
Skeptic Ginger 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 16th December 2016, 01:04 PM   #375
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It promotes crackpots and an assortment of right-wing "think tanks" (Atlantic Council, Carnegie Institute, ...). Figures the two of you would like it.
Can you provide evidence of the Atlantic Council or the Carnegie Institute being crackpots or right wing?
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 01:08 PM   #376
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
It is up to the claimant to support their claim with evidence. It is not up to me to design a study to test the claim. And I can most definitely ask about what evidence someone has available to support their claims with.



No it doesn't.
If you can't say what evidence will satisfy you, then it's reasonable to assume you can't be satisfied at all, especially when you assert fringe opinions.

Also, just because you personally are not satisfied doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to satisfy you. There are people who believe Elvis is still alive or that the Earth is flat. They don't need to be included in the dialog.
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 01:11 PM   #377
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 10,571
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
That's like you claiming Bigfoot exists
Except I haven't made a claim.

Quote:
And since you apparently haven't even acquired the data yet to support your claim with, I am left with the distinct impression that you're putting the cart before the horse in terms of "data implying conclusion".
Except I haven't made a claim.

Pay better attention please.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche 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 16th December 2016, 01:31 PM   #378
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
So caveman, you hand wave off SourceWatch
The term "hand wave" would apply to, without good argument, refusing to consider evidence. First, you have not provided evidence but someone's opinion, all you have is "someone says the NYT is reliable". Second, I've provided you the argument why I reject it, part of it is the complete lack of science-based references used in the article you have.

Quote:
and you claim that over 4 decades a handful of reporting errors makes the NYTs an unreliable source.
That wasn't my claim, your claim was that it was "reliable" (relative to "random person claims something). The onus is on you to provide evidence for your claim. The mere fact that I've illustrated some issues with your claim does not absolve you from your burden of proof, it merely illustrates even more the requirement for evidence to support you claim.

Quote:
I'm not impressed.
And I care because..?

Quote:
Back to the thread topic, "Fake news is a threat to democracy," I don't see the NYTs as being a significant part of that problem.
Well, I know this thread is in "USA Politics" but let's just for the sake of argument assume that non-Western people do, in fact, count as real people. Then, even from a cursory look, the NYT has produced fake news on at least two occasions in support of actions which lead to the killing of hundreds of thousands of people. Don't you think that's a problem for your "democracy"?

Quote:
Your position the NYT isn't a reliable source is duly noted, and not all that important to this discussion.
Yes, that's why I said that for the sake of argument we should assume non-Western people to be real people, and hence not just to be killed at will by a self-proclaimed "democracy" supported by its fake news sources.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 01:31 PM   #379
blutoski
Penultimate Amazing
 
blutoski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 10,744
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
I don't know what CFI is
Center for Inquiry. The original "skeptical" organization, predating Skeptical Society and JREF, they lobby Congress on behalf of skeptics. Publishers of Skeptical Inquirer.
__________________
"Sometimes it's better to light a flamethrower than curse the darkness." - Terry Pratchett
blutoski 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 16th December 2016, 01:32 PM   #380
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Can you provide evidence of the Atlantic Council or the Carnegie Institute being crackpots or right wing?
The Atlantic Council is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Association, NATO's official ideological wing. That by itself makes it right-wing.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 01:33 PM   #381
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
The Atlantic Council is a member of the Atlantic Treaty Association, NATO's official ideological wing. That by itself makes it right-wing.
That doesn't follow at all.
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 01:52 PM   #382
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
If you can't say what evidence will satisfy you, then it's reasonable to assume you can't be satisfied at all
Fine. Let A be the set of NYT articles on American foreign interference (military intervention, arming rebels, financially supporting certain political factions, etc). Let C be the set of all claims appearing in A. Partition C into 3 sets: C_official (claims which were also made by government officials in support of said interference), C_unofficial (claims which were not made by government officials in support of said interference) and C_irrelevant (claims which happen to appear in articles which are not relevant).

For each of these three sets, you will provide either the count or a statistical approximation of the count of:

True: the number of claims which were found true.
False: the number of claims which were found false.
Unknown: the number of claims for which we (still) don't know whether they are true or false.

Let's start with that, enjoy yourself.

Quote:
, especially when you assert fringe opinions.
The notion that the NYT is not reliable is not fringe. Nice ad populum btw.

Quote:
Also, just because you personally are not satisfied doesn't mean anyone else is obligated to satisfy you.
That is true. For example I might try to extract actual evidence from someone claiming things like alien abduction, but they are not obligated to satisfy me. That doesn't mean I can't try though.
__________________
"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; 16th December 2016 at 01:58 PM.
caveman1917 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 16th December 2016, 01:55 PM   #383
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
That doesn't follow at all.
Yes it does. If your argument is going to be "I can't imagine political positions to the left of imperialist democrats" then I am sorry to hear that but in no way responsible for your mental limitations.

Opposition to NATO is a core feature of the left. At best you could include indifference to NATO if you were pushing it. But standing their actually promoting NATO in its service as ideologue? No, see, that's what we call right-wing.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 02:13 PM   #384
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
Except I haven't made a claim.

Except I haven't made a claim.
Well then there is nothing to test in the first place.

Oh and you definitely made a claim, right here:
Originally Posted by varwoche View Post
A source like the NYT that has published countless news stories over a period of decades is going to have blemishes. It's impossible not to. Instead of cherry-picking those blemishes, how about we monitor the NYT going forward, alongside the abject garbage source that you won't concede is abject garbage?
Before you've even acquired the data you're already claiming that the result will be "the NYT is reliable", given that the examples will turn out to be "cherry-picked" rather than "representative".
__________________
"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; 16th December 2016 at 02:17 PM.
caveman1917 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 16th December 2016, 02:14 PM   #385
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,177
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Yes it does. If your argument is going to be "I can't imagine political positions to the left of imperialist democrats" then I am sorry to hear that but in no way responsible for your mental limitations.

Opposition to NATO is a core feature of the left. At best you could include indifference to NATO if you were pushing it. But standing their actually promoting NATO in its service as ideologue? No, see, that's what we call right-wing.
Sure, that's why Hillary was campaigning on things like disregarding Article V.

...oh wait.

"...we will work with the NATO-led coalition of partners..."

"We believe in strong alliances and will deter Russian aggression, build European resilience, and protect our NATO allies."

"...support a close relationship with states that seek to strengthen their ties to NATO and Europe..."

"We reject Donald Trump’s threats to abandon our European and NATO allies..."

"We will maintain our Article 5 collective security commitments to NATO because we are stronger when we have our allies at our side."

These are all pulled from the DNC platform.

Last edited by Delphic Oracle; 16th December 2016 at 02:19 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 16th December 2016, 02:18 PM   #386
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
Sure, that's why Hillary was campaigning on things like disregarding Article V.

...oh wait.
A right-wing candidate promotes NATO? Yes, your point being...?
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 02:22 PM   #387
Delphic Oracle
Master Poster
 
Delphic Oracle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 2,177
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
A right-wing candidate promotes NATO? Yes, your point being...?
If you get to make up both sides of the discussion, then there's really no reason for anyone else to participate in it, is 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 16th December 2016, 03:04 PM   #388
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,794
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
If you get to make up both sides of the discussion, then there's really no reason for anyone else to participate in it, is there?
That's pretty much it. i notice he hasn't even addressed the methodology MBFC uses, justs dimisses them on purely ideological (i.e. his own bias) reasoning.
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB 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 16th December 2016, 03:20 PM   #389
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post
If you get to make up both sides of the discussion, then there's really no reason for anyone else to participate in it, is there?
I said that opposition to NATO is a core feature of the left, you gave an example of a right-wing politician promoting NATO. If you can't see what's wrong with your counter-argument then I can't help you.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 03:24 PM   #390
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by LSSBB View Post
That's pretty much it. i notice he hasn't even addressed the methodology MBFC uses, justs dimisses them on purely ideological (i.e. his own bias) reasoning.
I notice you conveniently ignored my earlier request for evidence supporting MBFC's determination of Bellingcat as "Least Biased".

Are you saying you've changed your mind and now are willing to support it with evidence? I think it's great that you're now willing to provide MBFC's use of their methodology on Bellingcat, hence why I've already asked for it much earlier in this thread.
__________________
"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; 16th December 2016 at 03:26 PM.
caveman1917 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 16th December 2016, 03:25 PM   #391
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Yes it does. If your argument is going to be "I can't imagine political positions to the left of imperialist democrats" then I am sorry to hear that but in no way responsible for your mental limitations.
Yes, the radical left goes so far to the left as to be indistinguishable from the radical right. This is old news and is why supposed "leftists" end up supporting dictators and human rights abusers.

Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
Opposition to NATO is a core feature of the left. At best you could include indifference to NATO if you were pushing it. But standing their actually promoting NATO in its service as ideologue? No, see, that's what we call right-wing.
Fail.

Being opposed by a nebulous and vague "left" doesn't make it right-wing, but if you want to provide an authorive source of these supposed "core values" I would appreciate that.
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 03:32 PM   #392
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,763
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
A right-wing candidate promotes NATO? Yes, your point being...?
Did you miss the last year of Trump's campaign?
Skeptic Ginger 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 16th December 2016, 03:33 PM   #393
Mycroft
High Priest of Ed
 
Mycroft's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 18,586
Originally Posted by Delphic Oracle View Post

These are all pulled from the DNC platform.
You have to remember he's using a definition of "right-wing" that basically includes anyone to the right of Noam Chomsky.
Mycroft 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 16th December 2016, 03:34 PM   #394
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 63,763
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I said that opposition to NATO is a core feature of the left, ...
News to me and I've been a Progressive since before the term was used.

I agree with a couple other posts above, a discussion with you is simply not moving forward.
Skeptic Ginger 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 16th December 2016, 03:38 PM   #395
LSSBB
Devilish Dictionarian
 
LSSBB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: An elusive house at Bachelors Grove Cemetery
Posts: 15,794
Originally Posted by caveman1917 View Post
I notice you conveniently ignored my earlier request for evidence supporting MBFC's determination of Bellingcat as "Least Biased".

Are you saying you've changed your mind and now are willing to support it with evidence? I think it's great that you're now willing to provide MBFC's use of their methodology on Bellingcat, hence why I've already asked for it much earlier in this thread.
Their methodology is posted on their website. You have a quibble with the heuristics?
__________________
"Realize deeply that the present moment is all you ever have." (Eckhart Tolle, 2004)
LSSBB 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 16th December 2016, 03:41 PM   #396
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
Yes, the radical left goes so far to the left as to be indistinguishable from the radical right.
If anything is indistinguishable from the radical right it would be you.

Quote:
Fail.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 03:43 PM   #397
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Did you miss the last year of Trump's campaign?
Fascists are also opposed to NATO, yes. Again, the point being?
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 03:44 PM   #398
phiwum
Philosopher
 
phiwum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 8,924
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
News to me and I've been a Progressive since before the term was used.
So, prior to the 1890s?

(Yes, yes, I know, you mean prior to its current popularity. Just being a pedant.)
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 16th December 2016, 03:45 PM   #399
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
You have to remember he's using a definition of "right-wing" that basically includes anyone to the right of Noam Chomsky.
I'm using a definition of "right-wing" that basically includes anyone right of center.
__________________
"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 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 16th December 2016, 03:50 PM   #400
caveman1917
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 5,214
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
News to me and I've been a Progressive since before the term was used.
You're a liberal, you're not on the left. Besides, weren't you the one declaring during the Bernie campaign that the rest of the world had to give up the term "socialism" so that you could apply it to liberals such as Bernie? Yeah, I'll trust you on defining "left-wing"...

Quote:
I agree with a couple other posts above, a discussion with you is simply not moving forward.
Gee, I don't know, have you tried, like, providing evidence for the claims made? It's just an idea you know...
__________________
"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 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 » 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 06:23 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.