looks stoned. I think they need to lighten up a bit on the neuroleptic…
Archive for the ‘Dishonesty’ Category
There’s just no logical reason for this. Not even vaguely sensical.
am I so skeptical?
You can easily buy an alarm that rings when a freezer fails or warms up. That is standard for any modern freezer. Standard. My 10-year-old garage freezer has that, and it was by no means on the “bleeding edge” of technology when I got it–I just got the cheapest one I could! I mean, I got it at Sears.
Yet we are to believe that this scientific freezer didn’t have that very common feature? And it was research equipment? And there was pre-existing worry about the freezers failing and then the researchers did nothing about it? They had no alarms and no back-ups? Puh-leeze. The explanation is stupid, makes no sense to anyone who has been even peripherally involved in research (and to most people in general, as well), and is conveniently self-serving. It just makes no logical sense at all. And it is almost for sure a lie.
Here’s what most likely happened: The ice cores did not show global warming in preliminary tests so there was an “accident” where the ice cores melted and there therefore could be no more research on them because they disproved global warming. That is what happened.
THAT is entirely plausible, given the longstanding dishonesty of climate “scientists.” It would not be the first time they did something unscientific to throw shade on results they didn’t like. “The dog ate my homework” excuse is simply not believable at all.
if you would vote against Goresuch, you would vote against ANYONE nominated by a Republican. This is NOT an honest response.
This was ALWAYS a crock of Lefty crap.
There is NO evidence of collusion because (wait for it, wait for it) THERE WAS NO COLLUSION!
Even the Lefty accusations were NOT that the vote totals were interfered with, but that by hacking into her emails and revealing THE TRUTH it may have hurt Hillary. Please don’t be confused (and the Lefty shill media has worked hard to confuse you), there was NEVER a hint of the actual election being hacked. It was ONLY that Hillary’s emails were hacked and they revealed some very unflattering things about her, which may have led to her losing some votes. So let’s not be confused, now, at least. There’s just no excuse for it.
And Trump won the cited states by tens of thousands of votes (IIRC the one with the lowest Trump margin of victory was just over 70,000 votes). And she would have had to have won a half-dozen more states to even sniff victory. So you are telling me that many hundreds of thousands of voters in several different states would have voted for Hillary if her dishonesty had not be revealed by Wikileaks or whoever?
Oh Puh-Leeze! Only a complete and total moron would believe that. Even Hillary and her campaign didn’t believe that, which is why they didn’t challenge the results! If there had been a credible way to challenge the outcome of the election, don’t you think Hillary would have done so? Hillary is evil, but she is not a complete and total moron. THAT is why she didn’t challenge the results.
that Obama wiretapped him is entirely plausible. Obama is KNOWN to have done this before, so it’s not like we can just say that Obama would never do such a thing. He would and he has. It is a pattern.
I know the Lamestream media and the usual Democrat media hacks (though I repeat myself) have tried to make this seem like just an example of Trump’s paranoia, but that is just not true. So did Obama “bug” Trump? Yeah, most likely. Highly likely. Obama is just a bad, immoral guy. THIS is who he IS.
The Left just can’t compete in the marketplace of ideas. So they make up cock-and-bull stories to try and buttress their totally indefensible positions. But the truth is that Leftism is logically and morally indefensible. THAT is the problem.
Leftists should be totally embarrassed about how logically and morally weak their schtick is. And it boggles the mind that so many are snookered by this ruse.
is quite clear that Snopes plays fast and loose with the truth. Unfortunately, one cannot trust them. They are just shilling for a certain world-view.
Of course, that brings up the question of who you can ultimately trust. The answer? No one living on this earth.
There is no human source of unimpeachable knowledge. There is effort to be truthful, but not Cartesian certainty. There is no human Truth-Teller. There are only accounts, to riff off the Post-Modernists. So science is not a foundation for truth because it is dependent on human interpretation–a graph of numbers is totally meaningless until some human assigns meaning to it.
As Carl Popper so famously said, it is structurally impossible (due to the logical fallacy of Affirming The Consequent) to prove a theory correct (you can just rule out competing theories–thus falsification). And one can NEVER falsify ALL other known and unknown or even implausible explanations–it is logically and practically impossible. You can get approximations of truth from science (and that is indeed useful), but no Cartesian certainty. You get accounts, not immutable facts.
Journalism certainly isn’t a source of Truth–it is just the accounts and interpretations of the journalist. The only option is to turn to another source, or we are totally adrift on a Godless sea… In other words, the BEST sources of human-sourced knowledge have been incontrovertibly demonstrated to have feet of clay. They are ultimately unreliable.
Now Snopes has dutifully pooped in its own bed, following the lead of “climate scientists” and the MSM. You watch, this is the beginning of the end for Snopes. Their ONLY claim was that they told the truth, and that has been shown to be unequivocally false. They are shown to be just another axe-grinding hack. And ONE incident of demonstrable dishonesty ruins the whole thing–if it is 99% accurate, you can never be sure that any one item is not in the 1% false group. You can fish the poop out of the soup, but that doesn’t make the soup appetizing. It’s (to quote the original Iron Chef) OVAH! They are a dead man walking. I mean, on what grounds should I believe Snopes over a dog-faced baboon? I can’t think of one…
Yes, I agree that in the human realm there are no facts, only accounts. But one can STRIVE to give valid accounts. While that won’t fix the knowledge problem, it would be practically useful.
This Snopes thing is just another nail in the coffin of human truth. Already it is clear that only a great fool trusts the MSM. They abdicated their role of honest broker long ago.