Black Lives Matter "protest" lol...

[Crooked8]

Nevertrumper.......man thats got me so triggered oh my gosh. Im glad he keeps repeating that. Call us nevertrumpers all you want. To me that means alwaysrespectingpeoplers. It also means we are clearminders, racialequaliters, genderequaliters, knowitsnotahoaxers and noteasilyconvincedbyadumbassers. Im a proud nevertrumper. AlwaysTrumper? Alwaysdumber.

 

[Microbeman]

It is hard to believe I thought at one time you were one to listen to.:friends:
Oh well, they say never meet your heroes

What's the matter? Recognize yourself?

 

[Klompen]

People's obsession with George Soros is pretty absurd. The rich are constantly manipulating our economy, our elections, our wars, and so much more; but one guy gives to slightly more leftist causes and every alt-right conspiracy there is suddenly has him at the center like some sort of Palpatine just drooling at the prospect of obliterating our democracy or whatever you call this nightmare system we live under. Any time black people want anything resembling equal rights; its *obviously* all just a conspiracy by some white guy. Its fucking incredible how openly racist and crazy the Right has become in this country.

 

[Klompen]

Nevertrumper.......man thats got me so triggered oh my gosh. Im glad he keeps repeating that. Call us nevertrumpers all you want. To me that means alwaysrespectingpeoplers. It also means we are clearminders, racialequaliters, genderequaliters, knowitsnotahoaxers and noteasilyconvincedbyadumbassers. Im a proud nevertrumper. AlwaysTrumper? Alwaysdumber.

Right on! Shaggy is just a spammer anyway. I swear he has a big list of Logical Fallacies he would like to use and he just goes through it and checks them off after each post. The worst one is the "Begging the question" fallacy, but he also does the following on a regular basis:

"Strawman" "You say filtration is complicated and therefore you're agreeing that it doesn't work"

"Slippery Slope" "If we let them put masks on us, then soon they'll have leashes on us"

"False Cause" "There are more people dying from the virus, and more people wearing masks, so masks use must be bad for you"

"loaded question" "but what about missing kids???!"

"begging the question" "Since masks don't work, the scientific community must be lying to you right?"

"Burden of proof" "Sure I have a fringe theory, but its on everyone else to prove me wrong"

Oh and he does a reversed version of "bandwagon": Everyone else is jumping on the wrong bandwagon and only he knows the truth. You're wrong just by virtue of being on a bandwagon of any kind as long as it is in disagreement with him.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

- Its always good to hear both sides of the conversation - no matter what the topic - even if you might have already made your mind up about a particular subject -

- Without someone taking a contrary position to yours - you wouldn't have a chance to refute the argument so eloquently - and put your own opinion across - using sense, reason, pics/video and references if required -

- What is boils down to - is that not all opinions are the same - but you do have the opportunity to present your own opinion in contest against another - where-by the reader can see which argument makes more sense to them -

 

[Crooked8]

Right on! Shaggy is just a spammer anyway. I swear he has a big list of Logical Fallacies he would like to use and he just goes through it and checks them off after each post. The worst one is the "Begging the question" fallacy, but he also does the following on a regular basis:

"Strawman" "You say filtration is complicated and therefore you're agreeing that it doesn't work"

"Slippery Slope" "If we let them put masks on us, then soon they'll have leashes on us"

"False Cause" "There are more people dying from the virus, and more people wearing masks, so masks use must be bad for you"

"loaded question" "but what about missing kids???!"

"begging the question" "Since masks don't work, the scientific community must be lying to you right?"

"Burden of proof" "Sure I have a fringe theory, but its on everyone else to prove me wrong"

Oh and he does a reversed version of "bandwagon": Everyone else is jumping on the wrong bandwagon and only he knows the truth. You're wrong just by virtue of being on a bandwagon of any kind as long as it is in disagreement with him.

That is quite the epic breakdown ha....and in line with a lot of what ive seen. Some people cant listen. They just wont. Every word is noise but their own. If you wont wear a mask, youre really just being stubborn and pushing your opinion on others in a dangerous, even deadly manner. Its lunacy, like why not just wear it? The reasons why are all absurd!! But this is coming from a “nevertrumper” so im just insane and my opinion is so far left i just want to let murderous drug dealers into our country and take away everyones rights

 

[Klompen]

- Its always good to hear both sides of the conversation - no matter what the topic - even if you might have already made your mind up about a particular subject -

- Without someone taking a contrary position to yours - you wouldn't have a chance to refute the argument so eloquently - and put your own opinion across - using sense, reason, pics/video and references if required -

- What is boils down to - is that not all opinions are the same - but you do have the opportunity to present your own opinion in contest against another - where-by the reader can see which argument makes more sense to them -

In many ways this is what is so great about this site. That said, I think there's a sort of line one can cross from honestly feeling contrary views or confusion to just being a contrarian to mess with people. Maybe I'm just grumpy because my harvest is taking too long, but I honestly think its not helpful to have discussions turn into a 100+ pages of basically everyone arguing with a certain someone. Its like as soon as I see a certain avatar, I know that the discussion is going to get a dozen pages longer and absolutely nothing is going to actually be said because its all been trampled by a gish gallop. I don't know what the right answer is. I hate the idea of shutting people up, but I also think some people use their free speech to make it harder for others to use theirs. I honestly don't know if its all a deliberate effort to derail discussions or not, but the result is effectively much the same.

 

[nepalnt21]

Right on! Shaggy is just a spammer anyway. I swear he has a big list of Logical Fallacies he would like to use and he just goes through it and checks them off after each post. The worst one is the "Begging the question" fallacy, but he also does the following on a regular basis:

"Strawman" "You say filtration is complicated and therefore you're agreeing that it doesn't work"

"Slippery Slope" "If we let them put masks on us, then soon they'll have leashes on us"

"False Cause" "There are more people dying from the virus, and more people wearing masks, so masks use must be bad for you"

"loaded question" "but what about missing kids???!"

"begging the question" "Since masks don't work, the scientific community must be lying to you right?"

"Burden of proof" "Sure I have a fringe theory, but its on everyone else to prove me wrong"

Oh and he does a reversed version of "bandwagon": Everyone else is jumping on the wrong bandwagon and only he knows the truth. You're wrong just by virtue of being on a bandwagon of any kind as long as it is in disagreement with him.

is there one where when you make a great point backed up by logic, reason, evidence ... and shaggy p. balls ignores it entirely only to bring up the same tired bullshit later?

that one, which i see over and over, plus the fact that he seems to argue for points he doesn't even agree with, always makes me think he might be the most incessant and well- honed troll with the most amount of free (no job?) time i've ever heard of.

if this is the case, i'm actually impressed.

anyway, nice breakdown of fallacies. the more i learn which logical fallacies are which and how to spot them, the more i am convinced that absolutely everyone needs to learn and integrate them in like frigging middle school.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

- Yes - some people do find it hard to concede a point - when shown that perhaps they are misguided or plain wrong - most will not eat humble pie - but will argue their side even after it has quite obviously been disproved - and so becomes untenable - but is that not the reason for the debate in the first place - for one side to prove their reason, sense and logic before us that are reading the results?

- Different members come across as varied personalities that can range from the sublime to the ridiculous - it takes all sorts to make up this world - so we cannot always expect the reasonable and sensible to participate - although I'll agree - it would be nicer - with more level-headed debate -

On an open forum - you cannot guarantee that you will always get content that is to your liking - you just have to take the rough with the smooth -

In many ways this is what is so great about this site. That said, I think there's a sort of line one can cross from honestly feeling contrary views or confusion to just being a contrarian to mess with people. Maybe I'm just grumpy because my harvest is taking too long, but I honestly think its not helpful to have discussions turn into a 100+ pages of basically everyone arguing with a certain someone. Its like as soon as I see a certain avatar, I know that the discussion is going to get a dozen pages longer and absolutely nothing is going to actually be said because its all been trampled by a gish gallop. I don't know what the right answer is. I hate the idea of shutting people up, but I also think some people use their free speech to make it harder for others to use theirs. I honestly don't know if its all a deliberate effort to derail discussions or not, but the result is effectively much the same.

 

[Cannavore]

People's obsession with George Soros is pretty absurd. The rich are constantly manipulating our economy, our elections, our wars, and so much more; but one guy gives to slightly more leftist causes and every alt-right conspiracy there is suddenly has him at the center like some sort of Palpatine just drooling at the prospect of obliterating our democracy or whatever you call this nightmare system we live under. Any time black people want anything resembling equal rights; its *obviously* all just a conspiracy by some white guy. Its fucking incredible how openly racist and crazy the Right has become in this country.

Especially when to be a leftist you have to be anti capitalist at the very least. I'm sure all of these capitalists are actually anti-capitalists. wAkE uP ShEEpLe.

 

[Microbeman]

- Its always good to hear both sides of the conversation - no matter what the topic - even if you might have already made your mind up about a particular subject -

- Without someone taking a contrary position to yours - you wouldn't have a chance to refute the argument so eloquently - and put your own opinion across - using sense, reason, pics/video and references if required -

- What is boils down to - is that not all opinions are the same - but you do have the opportunity to present your own opinion in contest against another - where-by the reader can see which argument makes more sense to them -

Is that healthy applied to facts? I once proved without doubt that peat moss is not inert. I showed openly the microorganisms in it. Despite that, there are those who tell anyone who listens that it is inert. Some, out of loyalty to a side believe them.

This is exactly the problem. Some are tied to a 'side' and will support anything spouted by that side. For example, I hypothesized that the use of hydroxychloraquine as a prospective treatment for covid [before trump actually] and members on here did not believe it because they had pigeon holed me on a side.

When a supposed factual argument is based on a false basis [e.g. masks are used to exclude virus] how is this constructive?

However because my side is spouting this shit, I am honor bound to support it. I have discovered here that I am no longer brilliant, that members who once thought I posted practical information regarding horticulture have suddenly realized, I'm no longer smart.

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

- Facts? - it seems to depend where these facts come from for many - if its a right leaning source - then they will be discounted by those on the left - and if it is what's considered a left-wing source - then it will be discounted by the right - total polarization by so many - a division into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs - so it creates this: 'if you are not with us - then you are against us' situation - and agreeing to disagree rarely ends a debate
- more often someone has to throw their toys out of the pram - before they storm off - muttering gratuitous expletives as they go -

- Personally I much prefer to hear what any side has to say - I won't block one or the other out just because they might believe in something I do not - or are not popular among most members - because it is important to let everyone have their say - no matter how mad or twisted it may seem to you or me -

I'm not one to advocate this 'Cancel Culture' that looks to be a current trend - let people speak their minds - rather than being scared to because they might get picked on for thinking or saying something that might alarm someone else -

Is that healthy applied to facts? I once proved without doubt that peat moss is not inert. I showed openly the microorganisms in it. Despite that, there are those who tell anyone who listens that it is inert. Some, out of loyalty to a side believe them.

This is exactly the problem. Some are tied to a 'side' and will support anything spouted by that side. For example, I hypothesized that the use of hydroxychloraquine as a prospective treatment for covid [before trump actually] and members on here did not believe it because they had pigeon holed me on a side.

When a supposed factual argument is based on a false basis [e.g. masks are used to exclude virus] how is this constructive?

However because my side is spouting this shit, I am honor bound to support it. I have discovered here that I am no longer brilliant, that members who once thought I posted practical information regarding horticulture have suddenly realized, I'm no longer smart.

 

[Microbeman]

- Facts? - it seems to depend where these facts come from for many - if its a right leaning source - then they will be discounted by those on the left - and if it is what's considered a left-wing source - then it will be discounted by the right - total polarization by so many - a division into two sharply contrasting groups or sets of opinions or beliefs - so it creates this: 'if you are not with us - then you are against us' situation - and agreeing to disagree rarely ends a debate
- more often someone has to throw their toys out of the pram - before they storm off - muttering gratuitous expletives as they go -

- Personally I much prefer to hear what any side has to say - I won't block one or the other out just because they might believe in something I do not - or are not popular among most members - because it is important to let everyone have their say - no matter how mad or twisted it may seem to you or me -

I'm not one to advocate this 'Cancel Culture' that looks to be a current trend - let people speak their minds - rather than being scared to because they might get picked on for thinking or saying something that might alarm someone else -

Yes facts. Concrete ones, such as you yourself have presented when confronted with having a racist stance. You presented that you have a brown wife. Does anyone say bullshit, you do not have a brown wife?

I am not speaking of ethereal, political or idealistic type facts but actual stated facts. Again, I will use the mask example. The stated fact is that the reason for wearing the mask regarding covid is to prevent exit of aerosol. When an argument is presented discussing the entry of a virus, this is contrary to the fact. This is akin to me saying bullshit, you do not have a brown wife. Or you saying to me, bullshit, you did not prove that peat moss is inert.

One other point. I believe you said the purpose of debate is not to win. This is contrary to most university regulations.

 

[Microbeman]

BTW I also object to cancel culture and I reason that I am not requesting nor referring to such action.

 

[Microbeman]

Out of curiosity, what would be your response, Gypsy, if I were to post continuously with la,la,la,la,la,la,la, I can't hear you.?

 

[Gypsy Nirvana]

- I might suggest that you have your hearing checked -

- and yes - what may be a fact to you - could be questioned by someone else - and then you might have to prove it - if you wanted to verify this 'fact' -

* - to me 'winning' a debate is not so important - since during the debate I may learn something new about the topic that changes my view/opinion - to me its a learning experience - that's where you can 'win' - in what new knowledge you can attain -

Out of curiosity, what would be your response, Gypsy, if I were to post continuously with la,la,la,la,la,la,la, I can't hear you.?

 

[gaiusmarius]

In many ways this is what is so great about this site. That said, I think there's a sort of line one can cross from honestly feeling contrary views or confusion to just being a contrarian to mess with people. Maybe I'm just grumpy because my harvest is taking too long, but I honestly think its not helpful to have discussions turn into a 100+ pages of basically everyone arguing with a certain someone. Its like as soon as I see a certain avatar, I know that the discussion is going to get a dozen pages longer and absolutely nothing is going to actually be said because its all been trampled by a gish gallop. I don't know what the right answer is. I hate the idea of shutting people up, but I also think some people use their free speech to make it harder for others to use theirs. I honestly don't know if its all a deliberate effort to derail discussions or not, but the result is effectively much the same.

i been thinking in a similar way, these threads are interesting for the first while, but then it gets repetitive with new posters bringing up the same points.

there might be a real potential for a currator/editor to produce some really interesting reading by selecting the best posts into a new thread/book.

 

[Zeez]

i been thinking in a similar way, these threads are interesting for the first while, but then it gets repetitive with new posters bringing up the same points.

there might be a real potential for a currator/editor to produce some really interesting reading by selecting the best posts into a new thread/book.

Or...... The flip side......

The Wall of Shame.

Reality show of the extremes of propaganda and prejudice that we see here.

 

[shaggyballs]

Right on! Shaggy is just a spammer anyway. I swear he has a big list of Logical Fallacies he would like to use and he just goes through it and checks them off after each post. The worst one is the "Begging the question" fallacy, but he also does the following on a regular basis:

"Strawman" "You say filtration is complicated and therefore you're agreeing that it doesn't work"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....
"Slippery Slope" "If we let them put masks on us, then soon they'll have leashes on us"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....

"False Cause" "There are more people dying from the virus, and more people wearing masks, so masks use must be bad for you"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....

"loaded question" "but what about missing kids???!"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....

"begging the question" "Since masks don't work, the scientific community must be lying to you right?"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....

"Burden of proof" "Sure I have a fringe theory, but its on everyone else to prove me wrong"
Quote me saying anything close to this.....

Oh and he does a reversed version of "bandwagon": Everyone else is jumping on the wrong bandwagon and only he knows the truth. You're wrong just by virtue of being on a bandwagon of any kind as long as it is in disagreement with him.

Quote me saying anything close to this.....

Do you see you are just spouting more crazieness?
I don't play such childish games.
You nevertrumpers are the one's playing games here.
That is really self evident.

Feel free to quote if you think you are correct.

If you wish to prove me wrong....

Post some dam facts that show proof of the contrary.
It is that simple.

I am not saying I am right.
But there has been no evidence to counter my claims.

A lot of your wrong because I say so....LOL

You nevertrumpers are sooo dam irrational.

Why are you folks sooo dam crazy?

You folks are the looniest group I have ever seen in my life.

 

[shaggyballs]

- I might suggest that you have your hearing checked -

- and yes - what may be a fact to you - could be questioned by someone else - and then you might have to prove it - if you wanted to verify this 'fact' -

* - to me 'winning' a debate is not so important - since during the debate I may learn something new about the topic that changes my view/opinion - to me its a learning experience - that's where you can 'win' - in what new knowledge you can attain -

For the record I would rather have the real facts than to win a debate.
I really could care less about winning.

I think we should discuss everything like men.
We could find solutions to problems that way.

I take no issue being wrong.
I make mistakes, I am human, we do that from time to time.

I am open to admitting I am wrong, in the face of solid facts that is...

But when folks just say you are wrong and never provide any good reason as to why, like I am just supposed to take their word for it....
Well that will not get me to realize I am wrong.

Is it so wrong to asks for good facts to back up what a nay sayers says?
I think it is the proper procedure.

I only wish the truth, if you can not see that ....well you are probably a nevertrumper..LOL