Even more problematic stuff

[trdsf]

I think not. Assertions are not made in a vacuum, independent of the asserter.

Yeah, when we (including me) strawman, as we tend to do, we should immediately make a sincere attempt at 'steelmanning'.

Trouble is, I don't think anyone can, where there is such a rabid effort to take things out of context.

I think with the advent of video 'deep fakes', we will finally fully distrust media, and get back to good old fashioned methods.

I disagree; repeatable observations and independently confirmable facts in and of themselves resist being taken out of context -- I would say they are context. If someone goes too far and makes an unsupported assertion, that error can be identified by appealing to what is actually known and observed. There's never anything wrong with asking "How does (conclusion A) follow from (observation A)?" If the asserter can make a reasonable logical chain between them, there's at least a reason to give it consideration.

I try, not always with success but I do try, to find a non-partisan/non-biased source for my assertions. Wikipedia is good, not in and of itself, but because it contains links to the source material.

Granted, there might always be different interpretations of the facts... but the facts are what is actually observed, without regard to what one wants the observation to be. When all else fails, report the observations, explain one's interpretation of them (which is dependent upon but independent of the observations), and see if that stands up to hostile analysis. This applies equally well to media sources as it does anything else; if a source has a reputation for staying within the observed facts and identifying speculation as speculation, that's a reason to consider trusting that source.

[Brian Peacock]

Oh, and as to the predictions, lets go over Al Gore's predictions. He had access to the best information available, and I think made some.

If his predictions are spot on, great. If not, then the best information wasn't as good as most people thought.

Scientific 'truths' of this kind are always provisional, not absolute - projections are just that, and predictions in this area are propositions or hypotheses which will, or will not, be verified in due course. Carbon science and atmospheric chemistry are pretty robust sciences, and although the exact meteorological impact of increasing levels of greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere are a matter of ongoing scientific discussion and dispute, that increasing levels of these compounds will lead to temperature rises, melt offs, lowland inundations, and more chaotic and extreme weather patterns has broad and common agreement among scientific specialists. The scientific dispute is merely about localised scope or extent rather than about that broader picture.

[Hermit]

Didn't you all lose the right to defend yourselves in Australia recently?

Referring to the 1996 gun buyback scheme by any chance? If so, no, we did not all lose the right to defend yourselves in Australia. Not recently and not any other time.

1) Private ownership of firearms has not been made illegal. The 1996 gun buyback scheme resulted in 20% of privately owned firearms being taken out of circulation. It shouldn't be difficult for you to calculate that 80% of the pre-buyback firearms remain privately owned.

2) The concept of resorting to the use of firearms in order to defend ourselves has never really caught on in Australia in the first place.

[JimC]

We use devastating sarcasm instead...

[Forty Two]

Tucker Carlson Is Tired of People Yelling "Fuck You" At Him in Restaurants
https://splinternews.com/tucker-carlson ... 1829769468

“I can’t really go to a lot of restaurants anymore because I get yelled at,” he said on a National Review podcast released Monday. “I don’t feel threatened, but having someone scream, ‘Fuck you!’ at a restaurant, it just wrecks your meal.”

Carlson said he only goes to one restaurant these days. “I go there because I love it and nobody hassles me,” he said. “I can’t wait for this revolution to end, so I can go back out to dinner.” (He’s known to be a regular at The Palm, a steak house.)

Of course, he has a First Amendment right to espouse his opinions.

And the rest of us have a First Amendment right to call him on them. If he doesn't want people to publicly call him out on backing a wanna-be fascist dictator, maybe he should stop backing a wanna-be fascist dictator.

Sure, and the rest of us have a First Amendment right to call them, the asshats who yell "Fuck You!" at people eating dinner, out on their asshattish behavior. If they don't want people to publicly call them out on their clownish, doltish, profane, and vulgar tirades, then maybe they should stop acting like total asshats.

Therein lies the nature of free speech -- you have the right to tell someone shouting 'fuck you' to 'fuck off', and unquestionably the target and the authorities at the venue has the right to contact the local authorities and swear out a disturbing the peace complaint. I never said that speech doesn't have consequences.

No one has to like it, but as long as it's not inciting violence, it's legitimate. And if speech isn't protected at the fringes, then it's not safe anywhere.

I agree 100% with that, including allegedly racist speech, homophobic speech, fascist speech, anti-Islamic speech, transphobic speech, etc. etc.

I never said that they don't have the right to protest tucker carlson and tell him "fuck you." I just think they're dicks for doing it.

[Seabass]

A white nationalist polemicist gets harassed at restaurant, so naturally Coito takes issue with the protestors rather than the white nationalist. Didn't see that coming...

[Cunt]

It's ok to be racist against whites, or anyone opposed to globalism, so naturally Seabass takes the opportunity to show he is racist, globalist and can't remember which username he is answering.

[JimC]

Actually, I'm not greatly in favour of harassing individuals whose politics you detest in their private lives. If they're speaking at a rally, for example, then have at them!

[trdsf]

Therein lies the nature of free speech -- you have the right to tell someone shouting 'fuck you' to 'fuck off', and unquestionably the target and the authorities at the venue has the right to contact the local authorities and swear out a disturbing the peace complaint. I never said that speech doesn't have consequences.

No one has to like it, but as long as it's not inciting violence, it's legitimate. And if speech isn't protected at the fringes, then it's not safe anywhere.

I agree 100% with that, including allegedly racist speech, homophobic speech, fascist speech, anti-Islamic speech, transphobic speech, etc. etc.

I never said that they don't have the right to protest tucker carlson and tell him "fuck you." I just think they're dicks for doing it.

Whereas I think Carlson is a dick to begin with, on a much larger scale than someone telling him 'fuck you' in a restaurant -- Carlson is paid to deliver his opinions on a national platform; his protesters do not have that kind of reach.

That said, I doubt I would be one of the yellers of "fuck you" were I to spot him in a restaurant, if only because I wouldn't want someone doing that to me.

And *that* said, I don't think I'd be able to resist if it were Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh. I need that scale of horrible before I become a dick.

[Seabass]

It's ok to be racist against whites, or anyone opposed to globalism, so naturally Seabass takes the opportunity to show he is racist, globalist and can't remember which username he is answering.

I'm only racist against Coitos and Cunts.

[Cunt]

It's ok to be racist against whites, or anyone opposed to globalism, so naturally Seabass takes the opportunity to show he is racist, globalist and can't remember which username he is answering.

I'm only racist against Coitos and Cunts.

It was your own words I was copying. I know you are racist against whites, the race I am, and some other members, who's name you can't remember.

It must be all the years of stupid you have been spouting...some of it must have stuck to you.

[Brian Peacock]

I must've missed the memo. When did calling out white supremacists and ardent nationalists become being racists against whites?

[Forty Two]

Therein lies the nature of free speech -- you have the right to tell someone shouting 'fuck you' to 'fuck off', and unquestionably the target and the authorities at the venue has the right to contact the local authorities and swear out a disturbing the peace complaint. I never said that speech doesn't have consequences.

No one has to like it, but as long as it's not inciting violence, it's legitimate. And if speech isn't protected at the fringes, then it's not safe anywhere.

I agree 100% with that, including allegedly racist speech, homophobic speech, fascist speech, anti-Islamic speech, transphobic speech, etc. etc.

I never said that they don't have the right to protest tucker carlson and tell him "fuck you." I just think they're dicks for doing it.

Whereas I think Carlson is a dick to begin with, on a much larger scale than someone telling him 'fuck you' in a restaurant -- Carlson is paid to deliver his opinions on a national platform; his protesters do not have that kind of reach.

Tucker Carlson is generally a very fair minded person. What in the world do you think he said that deserves him being badgered in public with "fuck yous" at a restaurant?

That said, I doubt I would be one of the yellers of "fuck you" were I to spot him in a restaurant, if only because I wouldn't want someone doing that to me.

Indeed, normal people don't do that. I wouldn't do it to any political person or pundit I oppose. If I saw Rachel Maddow or Chris Hayes at a restaurant, I'd leave them alone. If they stepped up next to me at a bar at the airport, I'd say hello, and if they were of a mind to do so, I might talk with them pleasantly.

And *that* said, I don't think I'd be able to resist if it were Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh. I need that scale of horrible before I become a dick.

Not sure I'd even go there. If I saw the horrid Hillary Clinton or some miserable Young Turk at a restaurant, I'd not be inclined to yell at them.

[Forty Two]

I must've missed the memo. When did calling out white supremacists and ardent nationalists become being racists against whites?

When, for example, it's a bunch of Black Israelites yelling "white cracker faggots!" at a bunch of white teenagers minding their own business, and then the event being sold as some sort of offense committed by the white teenagers. That kind of thing.

The euphemism "calling out..." is often used to describe things that aren't actually calling anyone out on any actual wrongdoing.

[Svartalf]

well unless you carefully scan the crowd before getting in, you're all too likely to notice the horrible people dining there only after being seated, would you stop everything and go away?