Pudendum wrote:
If you had a comment about the movie, I might be more interested. As it is though, it sounds like you are trying to make some point. Be clearer, if you want to. Unless your neurological condition prevents you.

If your unspecified lack of understanding leads to you having conclusions, don't expect me to take them seriously.

THWOTH wrote:

Pudendum wrote:
If you had a comment about the movie, I might be more interested. As it is though, it sounds like you are trying to make some point. Be clearer, if you want to. Unless your neurological condition prevents you.

If your unspecified lack of understanding leads to you having conclusions, don't expect me to take them seriously.

So it does prevent you.

I understand, and accept your limitations.

Pudendum wrote:

[Reveal] Spoiler:

THWOTH wrote:

Pudendum wrote:

THWOTH wrote:
Lack of understanding about what?

How would I know?

Perhaps you have a neurological conditions, one that causes you to instantly forget what you've typed as soon as you hit submit? I'm curious why you're so keen to apply certain standards to the posts of others that you don't apply to your own. Any ideas?

lol

so you don't know what felltoearth was talking about either?

If I knew what they misunderstood, I could try to have a go at explaining. If you knew, you could explain.

If you had a comment about the movie, I might be more interested. As it is though, it sounds like you are trying to make some point. Be clearer, if you want to. Unless your neurological condition prevents you.

What movie? The one you haven’t watched?

The_Metatron wrote:
What movie? The one you haven’t watched?

Yes.

Good to see you made it to the first post in the thread.

Feel free to read further if you wish.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

felltoearth wrote:


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I still don't get what your (did you call it balderdash? Or gibberish?) posts have to do with the film.

I get the sense you posted in the wrong thread, or have only incomplete thoughts on the public response to the movie.

felltoearth wrote:

The Bee seems to think itself some kind of 'court jester', mocking those in charge.

How very DARE they !?!?!

https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-pause- ... n=telegram

"On January 6th, a branch of our federal government was almost overthrown because politicians used dangerous rhetoric that caused—wait, hold on everyone, I just got the update. Roe's been overturned!" said Representative Adam Schiff. "Okay, well if all the Republicans could please sit tight, there will be a brief recess while our Democratic caucus takes to the streets demanding we overthrow a branch of the federal government."

After closing down their presentation entitled "How Trump Undermined Institutional Authority", Democrats raced to join the crowd surrounding the Supreme Court building. "Rigged! Rigged decision!" shouted Senator Elizabeth Warren. "Judges must no longer be allowed to hold power! We will never abide by an illegitimate decision by an illegitimate court. Fight, fight!" she screamed as beleaguered police arrived in riot gear.

Despite the fact liberal states will still have the most permissive abortion laws in the world outside North Korea, Democrats helpfully painted the Supreme Court's decision as a matter of life and death. "They are literally going to enslave every woman in America and force them to have 17 babies," said Representative Ilhan Omar to a group of mentally unstable lunatics. "Which is why the Supreme Court cannot stand! To the streets!" she shouted, then returned to the House for a speech on why Trump's words were directly responsible for violence.

At publishing time, the January 6 committee had resumed its hearings to the stark sound of no one caring.

Pudendum wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:
What movie? The one you haven’t watched?

Yes.

Good to see you made it to the first post in the thread.

Feel free to read further if you wish.

Oh? You did finally find the bandwidth to watch it?

How long after you started this topic did you wait to finally see it?

The_Metatron wrote:

Pudendum wrote:

The_Metatron wrote:
What movie? The one you haven’t watched?

Yes.

Good to see you made it to the first post in the thread.

Feel free to read further if you wish.

Oh? You did finally find the bandwidth to watch it?

How long after you started this topic did you wait to finally see it?

I'm still not convinced it's worth my time to see it.

It IS quite fun to watch the various unhinged reactions to it though. Trump's are particularly funny. As are those complaining about how data aggregators aren't 'good enough' lol

Like I fucking thought. You STILL haven’t watched the movie you expect everyone else to watch and regale you with their comments.

The_Metatron wrote:Like I fucking thought.

You 'thought' lol

You STILL haven’t watched the movie you expect everyone else to watch and regale you with their comments.

Maybe read what I said, instead of imagining what you wish I said.

Probably the best review of this movie I've seen.

I agree with the title, but still don't usually watch vids.

The_Metatron wrote:Like I fucking thought. You STILL haven’t watched the movie you expect everyone else to watch and regale you with their comments.

Aye.

Pudendum wrote:

THWOTH wrote: I'm curious why you're so keen to apply certain standards to the posts of others that you don't apply to your own. Any ideas?

lol

Compare this kangaroo court film and the appeal to opinion polls to the litany of evidence presented by the United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack nearly entirely by long-term Republicans, even those who served under Trump.

There's no parity here at all - the internet clown show has real world consequences, as families like those of Heather Heyer and Ashli Babbitt can attest.

I will not stop arguing that a site like Rational Skepticism has a duty in times like this, especially when it is the internet which has become the enabler, the very medium in which recruitment and radicalization occurs. We can't stop this plague of bullshit from overrunning the internet - but I think we should be able to expect to send it packing here.

Spearthrower wrote:Compare this kangaroo court film and the appeal to opinion polls to the litany of evidence presented by the United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack nearly entirely by long-term Republicans, even those who served under Trump.

Well yes, exactly.

But that's precisely what VJJ and the alt-right trolls in general do (and they're very good at it unfortunately). Instead of concentrating on actual events we end up "debating" them over some nonsense incredibly low-stake made up controversy.

This case is particularly hilarious though. As many posters have noted VJJ hasn't even bothered to watch the video, which makes his opinion on the topic irrelevant. He's basically asking everyone else to be his own performing seals by "engaging in a debate" or "convincing him" or whatever. He's a complete waste of time but that's what he wants to be.

edit-spelling

Beatrice wrote:

Spearthrower wrote:Compare this kangaroo court film and the appeal to opinion polls to the litany of evidence presented by the United States House Select Committee on the January 6 Attack nearly entirely by long-term Republicans, even those who served under Trump.

Well yes, exactly.

But that's precisely what VJJ and the alt-right trolls in general do (and they're very good at it unfortunately). Instead of concentrating on actual events we end up "debating" them over some nonsense incredibly low-stake made up controversy.

This case is particularly hilarious though. As many posters have noted VJJ hasn't even bothered to watch the video, which makes his opinion on the topic irrelevant. He's basically asking everyone else to be his own performing seals by "engaging in a debate" or "convincing him" or whatever. He's a complete waste of time but that's what he wants to be.

edit-spelling

Spot on. It's really important that people wise up to the fact that, just as Creationists had the Dembski-mill and websites 'arming' them with bullshit to attack and undermine the public perception of evolution, so the alt-right mill is radicalizing people (mostly men) and training them to cynically exploit websites to induce doubt and undermine trust in democracy and democratic institutions. It's not a formal conspiracy in the old sense of the word - this is not due to a single personality or group of people actively seeking to do this (although there are such people) but rather it's exploiting the way the attention economy of the internet operates, and the freedom of expression that we hold dear. The motivation for this entire thread was cynical - an attempt to pretend parity between all manner of factors (i.e. the desperate repeated attempts to pretend this is just red/blue politics - i.e. the same as Creationists arguing evolution is a religion and thus the disagreement there is between two groups 'just as bad as each other'), to sow doubt and confusion, to pollute substantive discourse and have feelies trump facts.

When we see people like Mike_L go from being a fun, friendly chap to seriously quoting white supremacists, we have to understand how dangerous this device is that we've created.

I know that every generation has its moral panic over some form of technology, but none of the other examples have ever had a body of evidence showing that technology's link to radicalization and violent criminal activity. We have to wise up.