Riiight

[Ally]

Well New Scientist have to say that so there is then two sides to the same arguement, so then both sides can go on and on and on till no one can definitively say who is right or whos wrong

....... snip.....

Perhaps so herlock , But you know what they say about something that walks like a duck , looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ?

You are equating two completely different things. Scientific consensus is not about politics. Politics uses the fact that scientists are cautious before making a judgment to exploit stupid people who don't understand terminology because the dim are easily swayed with jargon. It's like imbeciles who use the "it's just a theory" phrase to discount a scientific theory because they equate your cousin Jethro's "theory" of flat-earth nonsense as being on the same playing field as a scientific theory, based on a fundamental lack of comprehension of what a scientific theory is.

The fact that scientists don't rush to judgment, unlike the majority of people, is to their credit, not to their detriment and they should be applauded for it, instead of derided. It's just a further example of how no one has standards anymore that people think it's a bad thing to not have an immediate answer to a complicated question. Because they've been conditioned with spoon-fed pap for so long, they can't tolerate anything that's not easily digestible and simple.

[FISHY1118]

You are equating two completely different things. Scientific consensus is not about politics. Politics uses the fact that scientists are cautious before making a judgment to exploit stupid people who don't understand terminology because the dim are easily swayed with jargon. It's like imbeciles who use the "it's just a theory" phrase to discount a scientific theory because they equate your cousin Jethro's "theory" of flat-earth nonsense as being on the same playing field as a scientific theory, based on a fundamental lack of comprehension of what a scientific theory is.

The fact that scientists don't rush to judgment, unlike the majority of people, is to their credit, not to their detriment and they should be applauded for it, instead of derided. It's just a further example of how no one has standards anymore that people think it's a bad thing to not have an immediate answer to a complicated question. Because they've been conditioned with spoon-fed pap for so long, they can't tolerate anything that's not easily digestible and simple.

When youve seen as many scientific ducks , political ducks , authoritarian ducks , news network ducks , social media organisation ducks, as i have, then perhaps you too might see them ducks are alllllllllllll the same .

[Ally]

Yes, I'm sure you have access to the super-secret wealth of ducks that no one else has access to. Possibly when everything starts looking to be a blurry same to you, it's time to get your eyes checked.

[FISHY1118]

[Svensson]

When youve seen as many scientific ducks , political ducks , authoritarian ducks , news network ducks , social media organisation ducks, as i have, then perhaps you too might see them ducks are alllllllllllll the same .

I don't get your point. What is it?

[Herlock Sholmes]

Perhaps so herlock , But you know what they say about something that walks like a duck , looks like a duck, and quacks like a duck ?

But if I wanted to know about ducks I’d ask a Biologist or a Zoologist rather than some bloke on the internet or a group of conspiracy theorists.

[FISHY1118]

Yes of course you would , im not surprised

[Ally]

I don't get your point. What is it?

LOL, like any of them actually have points and don't just spout off nonsense, non-sequiturs and random blather. It's like constant white noise for their brains so they don't have to deal with any inconvenient truths that might sneak their way in there.

[Svensson]

Thanks, I understand now. I will have my irony detector looked at first thing in the morning.

Cheers.

[celee]

Travel ban, that's it? LOL. Dumb. The numbers don't lie.

I guess that is true numbers do not lie and twice as many people have died of covid in America under Biden's administration despite the fact he had the vaccines and advanced therapeutics. The death rate of people 18-49 increased 40% in 2021. Blaming Trump for Biden's failure is ridiculous. Biden promised he had a plan to shut down the virus, not the economy. Biden said he would not have vaccine mandates. Biden said that any President who allows 200,000 people to die from the virus should resign. Well, he has allowed 400,000 people to die. Biden is a fool who focuses too much on vaccines that do not prevent getting or spreading the virus and ignore treating the virus with therapeutics.

[Herlock Sholmes]

The experts tell us to vaccinate. Conspiracy theorists refuse.

[celee]

[QUOTE=Svensson;n778586]

So celee, what I am doing here is trying to educate you about the difference between primary sources and secondary sources. If you do not trust the secondary source, then you can use the secondary source to check out the primary source which is what my intention was. In the case of the two links you provided, the MSN.com source sounds legit whereas the townhall source does not provide me with the info I needed to properly assess the problem. Which is another confirmation, in my mind, why prublications like townhall are BS touting propaganda outlets.

You made the claim that "Adam Schiff has forged a text message". The reason I insisted on you providing a link is that I know what you are actually talking about. There is no "forgery" going on here and even the townhall does not suggest a forgery. Secondly, I don't even know when and in what context the incident you alleged has taken place. Adam Schiff has been a target for Republicans for about 5 years now. Finally, as Ally says, the "Do you own research" argument is a cop-out. It means you are not willing to stand by your claim. For the party of personal responsibility, you laying the groundwork to deny just about anything if and when things go south OR, as in your case, just move on to the next talking point which has been created out of thin air.

As I have said before. I have debated you before and posted sources and you always claim fake news. There is no way to defend an argument using news sources if I have to use the outlets you prefer because a lot of your favorite sources do not cover the story. Remember how CNN and all the other liberal news sources refused to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story and when they did mention the story they called it Russian disinformation? Boy, they got that one wrong.

FOX News I would consider a primary news source. FOX is the number one watched cable news network but you do not accept any reporting from FOX news. They got the Hunter Biden story right. I could have posted news articles that went into much more detail on Shift but you would have dismissed them as propaganda. It is not fun debating by your rules and only reference News sources that you trust. The fact is MSN and CNN are bias. Obviously, MSN is going to defend Shift and his story that the text message was altered mistakenly. I would be willing to believe that too. However, Adam shift in front of the Senate committee read an altered version of the transcript between Trump and the President of Ukraine and when called out about it he said he altered the transcript for dramatic effect. There seems to be a pattern.

At the end of the day, people tend to listen to the news source that they agree with. Unfortunately, so few people pay attention to politics and world events they allow the news to influence how they feel. Examine the current discussion on Fauci. People watch whatever news source and read a science article and are influenced to believe what they are told about the origin of the virus however if they watched the Senate hearing a heard the testimony and evidence firsthand they would be able to make an informed judgment. I do not need a lecture on primary and secondary news sources I keep up pretty well. I mean you did not even know about the Shift story until I did the research for you.

I would be curious to know what you consider a primary news source LOL and why you are blinded to the fact they are biased.

[celee]

The experts tell us to vaccinate. Conspiracy theorists refuse.

interesting some experts say do not take the jab unless you are in a high-risk category. The founder of mRNA treatment came out and said children should never get the shot. In some areas in Australia, they have more double vaccinated people in the hospital than unvaccinated ain't that a kick in the pants and there is a lot of evidence the vaccines do not work. They are already talking about a fourth shot.

Herlock I do not wish to debate vaccines I see both sides. I do not know what the answer is? I do believe Biden's strategy of ignoring treatments that help people after they become infected in favor of mandating a vaccine is costing lives. Not allowing Doctors to treat patients who have covid with therapeutics to try and force people to vaccinate is foolish. Since when does it makes sense not to treat people early instead of waiting until they need a hospital?

[Svensson]

"I could have posted news articles that went into much more detail on Shift but you would have dismissed them as propaganda."

You did not understand my response correctly.what I said is this:

1. I need a full dataset to form an opinion.
2. The MSN article DOES provide the full dataset including full text as well as the abbreviated text presented by Schiff.
3. It so happens that I agree with the MSN judgment that this is does NOT meet the "doctored" and especially not the "forged" definition for the reasons I have given in my last paragraph. For your benefit, I will repeat that paragraph now:

So Schiff was correct in using this as an example of the kind of BS that was fed to Meadows. Schiff's punctuation is incorrect but it did not alter the central message, which is that Pence should ignore electoral slates based on no legal reason at all.

So I am reading the available info so I can make my judgment. MSM do provide me with that info, whereas townhall don't. Instead, they give you THEIR judgment. Which is why I consider Townhall propaganda.

Tell me, how do YOU judge a question like, let's say, should there be a vaccine mandate for teachers?

Cheers.

[Ally]

This has the potential to be hilarious. I can't wait for the critical analysis.