No, and I wouldn't care to teach you how to think, either. You either figure that out for yourself, or you fall on your ass a lot when you get blindsided by reality.
I get my information from any 500 websites and pages every week. The point isn't which one, or ones, it's the range of perspectives. Every site has a bias. But even a moderately intelligent Russian in 1980 could read Pravda or Izvestia back in the day, and still manage to glean the immutable truths from it: who the State didn't like that day. And knowing the compass from any organ of the State always pointed at lies, to head in a different direction. "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us" doesn't come from people bamboozled by the bullshitters. If it didn't work on those folks in the Soviet Union, what's your excuse?
You have well over a billion websites on the web to choose from.
Maybe staying away from the lunatic fringe, and finding the ones that offer best evidence rather than science fantasy spin would be a healthy first step.
More than 27 viewers, and fewer than three pinocchios. That should weed out about 90%.
If you really need your hand held on this, you're not tall enough for the internet. Which explains a lot. It's not that you disagree with something (any child can do that), it's that you can't articulate a rationale for the disagreement that holds water.
Be different from 90% of the internet: Stop looking for only just enough evidence to confirm your biases, and start looking for enough of a foundation of knowledge upon which to base a sensible position, and make sure there's nothing you forget to check that would wash your entire house of cards away. I can count the number of folks who do that most days on my fingers. The number who do it and can articulate it well on one hand.
I correctly pointed out from the outset that the entire basis for the utter nonsense about "US biowarfare labs in the Ukraine" was Russian bullshitters, and one mid-level midwit at the State Department (never known for intelligence of any sort, since ever) talking out of her ass.
Total number of people, places, and things, that could intelligently show otherwise: zero. Total number which specify that any of those labs are engaged in biowarfare, rather than garden-variety lab work: zero. And the harder people huffed and puffed, with zero evidence whatsoever to the contrary, the less it affects a house made of bricks. Learn a life lesson from the Three Little Pigs, and you'll spend a lot less time worrying about the Big Bad Wolf.
Just because the media has lied to us and told us that 2+2=5 doesn't automatically mean that the guy telling us that 2+2=potato is right.
But people keep trying to convince me that because the media is wrong, I automatically MUST believe that 2+2=potato, and if I don't, I'm somehow a Cuck dupe sheeple.
Aesop would you care to post a list of Acceptable Webpages to comment from, please?
ReplyDeleteI am very curious where you get so much information from, I suspect plenty of others have the same curious nature.
No, and I wouldn't care to teach you how to think, either. You either figure that out for yourself, or you fall on your ass a lot when you get blindsided by reality.
ReplyDeleteI get my information from any 500 websites and pages every week.
The point isn't which one, or ones, it's the range of perspectives. Every site has a bias. But even a moderately intelligent Russian in 1980 could read Pravda or Izvestia back in the day, and still manage to glean the immutable truths from it: who the State didn't like that day. And knowing the compass from any organ of the State always pointed at lies, to head in a different direction. "We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us" doesn't come from people bamboozled by the bullshitters. If it didn't work on those folks in the Soviet Union, what's your excuse?
You have well over a billion websites on the web to choose from.
Maybe staying away from the lunatic fringe, and finding the ones that offer best evidence rather than science fantasy spin would be a healthy first step.
More than 27 viewers, and fewer than three pinocchios. That should weed out about 90%.
If you really need your hand held on this, you're not tall enough for the internet. Which explains a lot. It's not that you disagree with something (any child can do that), it's that you can't articulate a rationale for the disagreement that holds water.
Be different from 90% of the internet: Stop looking for only just enough evidence to confirm your biases, and start looking for enough of a foundation of knowledge upon which to base a sensible position, and make sure there's nothing you forget to check that would wash your entire house of cards away. I can count the number of folks who do that most days on my fingers. The number who do it and can articulate it well on one hand.
I correctly pointed out from the outset that the entire basis for the utter nonsense about "US biowarfare labs in the Ukraine" was Russian bullshitters, and one mid-level midwit at the State Department (never known for intelligence of any sort, since ever) talking out of her ass.
Total number of people, places, and things, that could intelligently show otherwise: zero.
Total number which specify that any of those labs are engaged in biowarfare, rather than garden-variety lab work: zero.
And the harder people huffed and puffed, with zero evidence whatsoever to the contrary, the less it affects a house made of bricks.
Learn a life lesson from the Three Little Pigs, and you'll spend a lot less time worrying about the Big Bad Wolf.
LOL your good.
ReplyDeleteJust because the media has lied to us and told us that 2+2=5 doesn't automatically mean that the guy telling us that 2+2=potato is right.
ReplyDeleteBut people keep trying to convince me that because the media is wrong, I automatically MUST believe that 2+2=potato, and if I don't, I'm somehow a Cuck dupe sheeple.