Trump supporters, how do you square this?

[Fryowa]

But again, somehow Israel has us by the balls.

Not really. We have them by the balls because if we stopped being their ally, they'd be up shit creek without a paddle.

You know why the attacks slowed down on Israel once we brought a single aircraft carrier visible over the horizon and just sat there in the Mediterranean? Because it was a silent message to knock it off and it worked. For Israel. It isn't going to stop the conflict though.

 

[PCHawk]

Kennedy??? You want me to believe him??? What "facts" did he bring to the table on top of all of his conspiracy theories, heroin usage, brain worm, womanizing... Hard to really believe much out of him. I might as well listen to Joe Rogan's facts.

Why do you keep going back to these loonies??? It's a cult

Thats kinda a problem. If you don't even know what facts he lays out, you have to listen to someone else's opinion on whether or not he's a loony. Truth is, Kennedy gives tons of facts, some of which are based on anecdotal (which he admits) and some of which are really damning. To have such a strong opinion of someone without ever even knowing they have pointed out facts is wild.

And Joe Rogan doesn't give facts. His guests do. Again, the opinion of him spoon fed my media compared to reality is miles apart. If you listened to 10 episodes of Rogan your mind would probably be blown and how wrong you were. Do you have hobbies or interests? He's interviewed everyone in everything by now. What do you live and who's someone famous that does it? Hunting? War vets? Martial arts? Sports? Actors? I personally love pool. He's had pool players on. He used to be a huge Bernie Sanders fan. He's had him on.

After CNN filtered his face yellow when he had covid and said he took horse dewarmer He's definitely more radicalized so I suggest not picking one that has anything to do with covid. But if you ever want to see how bad you are being duped into hating people, watch some Rogan podcasts with a guest you have interst in. You would win in two ways. One is it's really cool to hear guys talk for 3 hours about a topic you enjoy. The other is you would maybe me more skeptical about hating someone the media tells you to hate.

 

[Hay Man]

Thats kinda a problem. If you don't even know what facts he lays out, you have to listen to someone else's opinion on whether or not he's a loony. Truth is, Kennedy gives tons of facts, some of which are based on anecdotal (which he admits) and some of which are really damning. To have such a strong opinion of someone without ever even knowing they have pointed out facts is wild.

And Joe Rogan doesn't give facts. His guests do. Again, the opinion of him spoon fed my media compared to reality is miles apart. If you listened to 10 episodes of Rogan your mind would probably be blown and how wrong you were. Do you have hobbies or interests? He's interviewed everyone in everything by now. What do you live and who's someone famous that does it? Hunting? War vets? Martial arts? Sports? Actors? I personally love pool. He's had pool players on. He used to be a huge Bernie Sanders fan. He's had him on.

After CNN filtered his face yellow when he had covid and said he took horse dewarmer He's definitely more radicalized so I suggest not picking one that has anything to do with covid. But if you ever want to see how bad you are being duped into hating people, watch some Rogan podcasts with a guest you have interst in. You would win in two ways. One is it's really cool to hear guys talk for 3 hours about a topic you enjoy. The other is you would maybe me more skeptical about hating someone the media tells you to hate.

I never said anything about hating Joe Rogan. Once again, your assumption. I've listened to Joe Rogan and some of it is great. I loved Fear Factor when he was on it. He's awesome on UFC fights.

Trump and Kennedy are a different subject all together. I do realize that Kennedy does bring facts to the table, but he's also thrown some seriously terrible things out there too. His anti-vax stance has gotten people killed - Samoa - and the list goes on with crazy shit.

I have no problem with being presented with facts from people on both sides, but a lot of times after the facts are presented, those people start spewing things that aren't facts and tying them all together. Democrats are as much to blame as Republicans. But I have the right to dislike people who I don't think are good people and acting in good faith with what I deem to be morally and ethically correct.

 

[Fryowa]

Truth is, Kennedy gives tons of facts, some of which are based on anecdotal (which he admits) and some of which are really damning.

Friggin hol' up a sec...

---

Oxford definition of the word fact...

"That which is known to be real or true, especially when it can be proved."

---

Oxford definition of the word "anecdotal:"

"not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research."

Anecdote and fact could not have more opposite meanings. They are literally antonyms.

 

[ajdwhs87]

Musk must have done something right, since his personal net worth since the November election increased by $156 billion. Total USAID annual spending to provide food, medicine, shelter and other services to impoverished countries around the world: $38 billion.

You think Musk has that laying around? Yep, but he'd rather shut it down.

Now, I believe we give way too much money to other countries and wars, but Elon isn't from America. If he's so concerned about humanity, why wouldn't he take care of this? Or at least help?

Again you are misleading. What are most of the things they are looking to cut from USAID? DEI for the Serbian workplace, money to politico and other media and other stuff. There is a freeze. They say not all aid is being cut. If they pause it and go over stuff and weed out any abuse or fraud or waste that will be a good thing.

On the one hand people were critical of Trumps spending but Biden spend the most as president. It has to be reviewed and have checks on it.

For example look at how bad the F.A.A. is and they say it has been this way for years. So Obama rolled out an F.A.A. overhaul for 64 billion in 2012 and that got rolling for 2013 and if it even only took a year how can people being saying it has been a declining for years in 2024. If you don't double check and see where the $$ are going and the job is being done right you get wastes and fraud. Same as if you are giving a contractor money. Gov't spending which involves politicians needs oversight. Saying 64 billion to fix FAA and 38 billion to help foreign countries sounds good or makes you feel good then you go back to sleep about it as if there isn't waste or fraud or use for things we won't be happy with.

I know I am tired from the politics as usual where lip service is given and things aren't done at all. Then things are done are not overseen or get derailed with gov't bureaucracy. Let's see how them going through things works out. Then you can bash them. Still plenty of people want to dig and go after this administration so it is not like if they F up it will be covered up by the media.

 

[PCHawk]

Not really. We have them by the balls because if we stopped being their ally, they'd be up shit creek without a paddle.

You know why the attacks slowed down on Israel once we brought a single aircraft carrier visible over the horizon and just sat there in the Mediterranean? Because it was a silent message to knock it off and it worked. For Israel. It isn't going to stop the conflict though.

Think Jeffery Epstein "got us by the balls".

 

[PCHawk]

Friggin hol' up a sec...

---

Oxford definition of the word fact...

"That which is known to be real or true, especially when it can be proved."

---

Oxford definition of the word "anecdotal:"

"not necessarily true or reliable, because based on personal accounts rather than facts or research."

Anecdote and fact could not have more opposite meanings. They are literally antonyms.

Yes I didn't word that the greatest. But I did separate the two for that reason. Like it's a fact that a bunch of moms came to him and told their stories of how their kids changed right after getting a vaccine. But it's also anecdotal evidence. He has lots of that type of info and lots of straight up data facts type of info that can be looked up and can't be disputed. That's what I meant.

 

[Hay Man]

Again you are misleading. What are most of the things they are looking to cut from USAID? DEI for the Serbian workplace, money to politico and other media and other stuff. There is a freeze. They say not all aid is being cut. If they pause it and go over stuff and weed out any abuse or fraud or waste that will be a good thing.

On the one hand people were critical of Trumps spending but Biden spend the most as president. It has to be reviewed and have checks on it.

For example look at how bad the F.A.A. is and they say it has been this way for years. So Obama rolled out an F.A.A. overhaul for 64 billion in 2012 and that got rolling for 2013 and if it even only took a year how can people being saying it has been a declining for years in 2024. If you don't double check and see where the $$ are going and the job is being done right you get wastes and fraud. Same as if you are giving a contractor money. Gov't spending which involves politicians needs oversight. Saying 64 billion to fix FAA and 38 billion to help foreign countries sounds good or makes you feel good then you go back to sleep about it as if there isn't waste or fraud or use for things we won't be happy with.

I know I am tired from the politics as usual where lip service is given and things aren't done at all. Then things are done are not overseen or get derailed with gov't bureaucracy. Let's see how them going through things works out. Then you can bash them. Still plenty of people want to dig and go after this administration so it is not like if they F up it will be covered up by the media.

My only point there is that Elon Musk hasn't help anyone but himself.

Is he going to cut all of the billions he gets in contracts from the government for his businesses or is that not waste or over spending? I'm all for cutting spending on useless projects, like going to Mars...

 

[PCHawk]

I've never once in this enormous circus of a thread heard you accept a single thing that was critical of Elon Musk. You're hugely biased towards believing everything he says and supporting everything he does. Any article or medium that supports his position and actions you support, and every one that criticizes you say is a hit piece. That's severe bias and at that point we don't have any discussion really on Musk. It is what it is and that's ok.

At one point I said there is a realistic possibility that he ends up the biggest villain the world has ever seen. I also recently said I don't agree with not letting anyone into the USAID to look over their shoulder. You have a serious issue with reading posts through a lense of what you already assume it's going to say. You've shown that multiple times.

 

[PCHawk]

Do you believe any of the facts that Dr. Fauci brought up? Probably not.

If I was a liberal I would accuse you of whataboutism right now. But since I'm not I realize being hypocritical is douchey and you want to know if I'm being hypocritical right now. So that makes your "whataboutism" a good question in my mind. My answer is I don't believe his overall message on covid. But if he points out numbers that are facts, I do believe those. Then I can make a personal decision on whether or not he is misrepresenting facts to paint a narrative. If you originally said Kennedy does that, I wouldn't have a problem with you thinking that. But you insinuated you don't even know Kennedy gives facts, which he most certainly does. If you never even bother to hear his facts, you can't make a personal decision on if he's skewing them to paint a different picture. You just have to listen to the media say he's a loony and blindly believe them.

 

[Hay Man]

If I was a liberal I would accuse you of whataboutism right now. But since I'm not I realize being hypocritical is douchey and you want to know if I'm being hypocritical right now. So that makes your "whataboutism" a good question in my mind. My answer is I don't believe his overall message on covid. But if he points out numbers that are facts, I do believe those. Then I can make a personal decision on whether or not he is misrepresenting facts to paint a narrative. If you originally said Kennedy does that, I wouldn't have a problem with you thinking that. But you insinuated you don't even know Kennedy gives facts, which he most certainly does. If you never even bother to hear his facts, you can't make a personal decision on if he's skewing them to paint a different picture. You just have to listen to the media say he's a loony and blindly believe them.

Just proving a point

 

[CP87]

Yes I didn't word that the greatest. But I did separate the two for that reason. Like it's a fact that a bunch of moms came to him and told their stories of how their kids changed right after getting a vaccine. But it's also anecdotal evidence. He has lots of that type of info and lots of straight up data facts type of info that can be looked up and can't be disputed. That's what I meant.

One thing I teach to my students all the time is: evidence does NOT equal truth.

If you want something to be true (anything), you can find some evidence to support it. But evidence exists at many different levels of quality. Some is very low quality (anecdote, expert opinion).

Just above that is basic science stuff (animal models, cell models, etc.)...that makes up most of biomedical research, and it is absolutely critical to being able to develop future interventions to translate to humans. But, the vast majority of what looks promising at a basic science level craps out when it is applied to humans. Like, way more than 90% of what we think we know from basic science doesn't actually translate in the way we expect to the human.

A step higher, we have epidemiology (observational research). We are observing what free-living humans are doing (we are not controlling anything), and we are comparing this to the outcomes we are observing. This is how we know exercise helps us live longer, obesity shortens our lifespan, etc.

Highest level of experimental evidence is the randomized controlled trial (RCT). You predict what happens with an intervention, you apply the intervention, you see if your prediction holds true. Not all questions can be approached with an RCT, of course.

But what really matters it the BODY OF EVIDENCE. That is why the systematic review is considered the strongest evidence...it is a collection of all evidence that exists on a topic, systematically gathered, and synthesized to come to the most likely conclusion.

RFK, Jr. might be able to cherry-pick a piece of evidence here and there, but his argument is strongly refuted by the body of evidence regarding vaccine efficacy and safety. We should be open to the idea that for certain populations, vaccine risks (which absolutely do exist) might potentially outweigh benefits; and that is probably a question and a topic that should be studied more. But I have heard enough outrageous statements come out of his mouth that fly in the face of existing evidence to consider him a charlatan, and to not really want to waste any more of my life trying to take his schtick seriously.

I am also not interested in, "But look at this one video where he says something that is reasonable!" He talks out of both sides of his mouth, sounding reasonable when in a setting where it is expected, and going full-blown crazy in other settings. He is a serial liar, and no one should take him seriously unless they are hungry for the snake oil he is selling.

 

[Fryowa]

I've never once in this enormous circus of a thread heard you accept a single thing that was critical of Elon Musk. You're hugely biased towards believing everything he says and supporting everything he does. Any article or medium that supports his position and actions you support, and every one that criticizes you say is a hit piece. That's severe bias and at that point we don't have any discussion really on Musk. It is what it is and that's ok.

@PCHawk you still didn't address bolded.

 

[Fryowa]

Yes I didn't word that the greatest. But I did separate the two for that reason. Like it's a fact that a bunch of moms came to him and told their stories of how their kids changed right after getting a vaccine. But it's also anecdotal evidence. He has lots of that type of info and lots of straight up data facts type of info that can be looked up and can't be disputed. That's what I meant.

Bolded is false. Mom's telling RFK something is anecdote, not fact. Fact and anecdote cannot go together. Read the definitions of those words. They are mutually exclusive.

 

[PCHawk]

Because "prime" is a relative term of perception and everyone's perception is different.

And because we're talking about the land being "prime" with respect to the Palestinians. Not an Amazon tribe and not anyone else. Unless you're talking about kicking the Palestinians out, taking possession of the Gaza Strip for the US, and developing it for some other group. Which is completely irrelevant to the discussion.

With respect to the Palestinians, it is 100% not "prime" land at all. But that isn't why they want it. They claim divine rights to it and will die for it. That isn't going to change no matter where you round them all up and resettle them.

Ok so when they came up with the two state solution, which part if Israel is more "prime" that they could have gotten instead? Every argument you've made so far seems more like you're talking about their "situation" not being prime more than the land they got. You talk about their borders with the sea, Israel, and Egypt. Well what part of Israel could they have taken that wouldn't have bordered with Israel?

 

[Westernhawk]

Okay, something from my work world, that I know some of you will find really wild.

Here's some of the words that, if used in your research study, will get your federal funding yanked:

1. Trauma (what if that's the thing you're studying?)
2. Women (!)
3. Barrier (people do research on the blood brain barrier, for example), but that word is now on "the list
4. Victim

If you think this is okay, you are insane.

 

[Westernhawk]

Kennedy intentionally misrepresented a research study related to Thimerosal, and it was seen by tons of people on a podcast.

Even his "facts" aren't facts.

Feel free to look this up yourself. I'm not interested in helping folks on here who just want to fight.

 

[Westernhawk]

One thing I teach to my students all the time is: evidence does NOT equal truth.

If you want something to be true (anything), you can find some evidence to support it. But evidence exists at many different levels of quality. Some is very low quality (anecdote, expert opinion).

Just above that is basic science stuff (animal models, cell models, etc.)...that makes up most of biomedical research, and it is absolutely critical to being able to develop future interventions to translate to humans. But, the vast majority of what looks promising at a basic science level craps out when it is applied to humans. Like, way more than 90% of what we think we know from basic science doesn't actually translate in the way we expect to the human.

A step higher, we have epidemiology (observational research). We are observing what free-living humans are doing (we are not controlling anything), and we are comparing this to the outcomes we are observing. This is how we know exercise helps us live longer, obesity shortens our lifespan, etc.

Highest level of experimental evidence is the randomized controlled trial (RCT). You predict what happens with an intervention, you apply the intervention, you see if your prediction holds true. Not all questions can be approached with an RCT, of course.

But what really matters it the BODY OF EVIDENCE. That is why the systematic review is considered the strongest evidence...it is a collection of all evidence that exists on a topic, systematically gathered, and synthesized to come to the most likely conclusion.

RFK, Jr. might be able to cherry-pick a piece of evidence here and there, but his argument is strongly refuted by the body of evidence regarding vaccine efficacy and safety. We should be open to the idea that for certain populations, vaccine risks (which absolutely do exist) might potentially outweigh benefits; and that is probably a question and a topic that should be studied more. But I have heard enough outrageous statements come out of his mouth that fly in the face of existing evidence to consider him a charlatan, and to not really want to waste any more of my life trying to take his schtick seriously.

I am also not interested in, "But look at this one video where he says something that is reasonable!" He talks out of both sides of his mouth, sounding reasonable when in a setting where it is expected, and going full-blown crazy in other settings. He is a serial liar, and no one should take him seriously unless they are hungry for the snake oil he is selling.

I love your posts. Thank you.

 

[Westernhawk]

Each day, the news gets even more strange.

The FBI is preparing to disband a team of specialists charged with combating foreign threats to US elections.

Nothing to see here. Flood the zone.

 

[Fryowa]

Every argument you've made so far seems more like you're talking about their "situation" not being prime more than the land they got. You talk about their borders with the sea, Israel, and Egypt. Well what part of Israel could they have taken that wouldn't have bordered with Israel?

Not sure if you've looked at Gaza on a map. It's exactly 25 miles of coastline and 5 miles wide with no port. Gaza is microscopic as countries/territories/settlements go. How does a 25 mile coastline with no port, no industry, no fresh water access, and no natural resources fit into "prime" status for any country unless it's connected to something else? It's got nothing appealing about it. Go take a good hard look at it on google maps.

The Palestinians have (had) 2.3 million people crammed inside the walls. Yes, it's a walled off area that you can't leave or enter at will.

Ok so when they came up with the two state solution, which part if Israel is more "prime" that they could have gotten instead?

They got the shittiest part of Israel because that's what Israel offered them. It's no different than most Indian reservations in the US. It doesn't really matter if there were better areas.