Now that Musk owns Twitter

veni vidi vici

Omne quod audimus est opinio, non res. Omnia videm
5,846
1,260
One way to become an idiot is to fail to understand that the credibility of any source is the most important characteristic of the information provided by the source.
MSM & Russian Collusion?
Covington Kids hoax.
Trayvon Martin hoax
Hands up don't shoot hoax
Russia Russia Russia hoax
Mostly peaceful protesters hoax
Insurrection hoax
Fine people on both sides hoax
Smollett hoax
Rapist Kavanaugh hoax
Pee pee tape hoax
Rittenhouse hoax...
????
Youz batting .000
 

Voyageur

Super Anarchist
4,302
1,099
On The Borderline
MSM & Russian Collusion?
Covington Kids hoax.
Trayvon Martin hoax
Hands up don't shoot hoax
Russia Russia Russia hoax
Mostly peaceful protesters hoax
Insurrection hoax
Fine people on both sides hoax
Smollett hoax
Rapist Kavanaugh hoax
Pee pee tape hoax
Rittenhouse hoax...
????
Youz batting .000
you are trying way too hard. if you were good at this, it would be easy. you suck.
 

Dog 2.0

Super Anarchist
3,160
496

Clove Hitch

Halyard licker
10,588
1,783
around and about
Therefore, the story can't be accurate.

No ... That would be the accuracy of the information itself.
Someone like you who is very gullible, easily duped, and manipulated by misinformation needs to be very careful and should probably stick to Credible Blue Chip sources.

Remember how you said Tucker Carlson was one of the smartest, insightful commentators on TV? And yet in court Tucker said that only morons take him seriously. Not a difficult syllogism to conclude that you self identify as a moron.
 

Sol Rosenberg

Girthy Member
95,312
12,530
Earth
6C83E05C-C438-4E62-9246-64D690276E16.jpeg
 

phillysailor

Super Anarchist
8,888
3,671
An idiot would be one who thinks he has refuted a story by disparaging the source.
As soon as you start referencing legitimate sources you can sit at the adults table.

Quoting opinion pieces is lazy. Thinking opinions you found via Google should counter facts, evidence is childish.

Why do you want us to laugh at you?
 

MR.CLEAN

Moderator
46,875
4,850
Not here
No ... That would be the accuracy of the information itself.
Which is assessed by:

1) examination of credibility of evidence
2) if credible, determination of whether evidence proves source assertion/conclusion
3) examination of credibility of witness
4) if credible, determination of whether witness statement(s) proves source assertion/conclusion
 

Steam Flyer

Sophisticated Yet Humble
45,462
10,222
Eastern NC
As soon as you start referencing legitimate sources you can sit at the adults table.

Quoting opinion pieces is lazy. Thinking opinions you found via Google should counter facts, evidence is childish.

Why do you want us to laugh at you?

It kind of begs the question, doesn't it... are all Trumpers/RWNJs really and truly stupid as fuck, or are they just so bigoted and closed-minded that they eagerly sieze any delusion offered them, and refuse to let go?
 

phillysailor

Super Anarchist
8,888
3,671
I think it’s part of the universal skepticism with which they view all expert opinion, be it virologists, climate scientists, election officials or, really any intellectual discussion.

Kelly Ann put her finger on it: don’t like the facts? Start discussing new ones.
So much easier than trying to compete. Smells like teen spirit and so much more fun!
 




Top