you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (22 children)

Thanks, but no way.

Saiditors might be mean, but they're not nearly as gullible and dumb as gab users, IMHO.

[–][deleted] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (18 children)

Ad homonym. Ad homonym & clarifying honesty through subjectivity.

Consistently, insincere an untruthful. Antithesis of honest.

[–][deleted]  (5 children)

[deleted]

    [–]send_nasty_stuff 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

    Some fading star of the early 90s tech boom who just got on the board of a new startup. ;) Oh, and 4 of their 5 kids have autism.

    What are your thoughts on the cause of autism? It's gotta be environmental. It's was basically unheard of a 100 years ago. I've heard two main theories. Aluminum or other additives to vaccines (A new thing in history). Older parents (also a relatively new thing in history).

    Even though I think the onslaught of vaccines on for infants is a problem I lean toward the old egg and old sperm issue. If you go to schools with younger families there's almost no autism. Schools in white areas with older parents have LOTS of autism. This also explains why whites seem to be more effective. It might also have something to do with too much estrogen in utero causing the male brain not to form correctly? I'm just spit balling here. Autism does tend to affect males more and it seems to have something to do with gender in the brain.

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]send_nasty_stuff 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      Those who work in tech seem to share similar personality types, which in genetics works to reinforce certain traits, as well as to bring out other defects.

      I've had this notion about autism as well. More then ever people with highly analytic detail oriented minds are breeding in elite circles and some of these minds might be producing defects as a result of the heavy cognitive specialization. We know the Ashkenazim have higher rates of schizophrenia. Imagine if it came out that geniuses should be weary of mating with eachother? That would be fascinating. I've always thought that we should pair the brightest male minds with the finest genetic female specimens. A harem of Olympic female pole vaulters for each and every great male mind. Assuming they are nationalist moral geniuses and not evil subversive geniuses.

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      Thanks for this

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (11 children)

      You're definitely projecting.

      [–][deleted] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

      Not quite. Enjoy your day.

      [–]Jesus 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (9 children)

      [–][deleted] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

      Good find!

      [–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

      Thank you, Jesus.

      (And - OMG - what a website.)

      [–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

      OMG in a bad or good way?

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

      A little of both. I agree with much of what I've read thus far (good), but the journalism isn't corroborated well and not balanced well with other facts (bad) that would help those of us who want to use the site as a factual resource. For example, were I to send one of the articles to someone as evidence, they would correct when noting that the article is not appropriately supported by evidence. I've seen some of the evidence that the articles do not mention, so I find the website useful for articles that can supplement other forms of better journalism (eg. balanced and with better evidence). As I look at the front page, I agree with notes on 911, Israeli lobby, ISIS, Syria, Libya, Chavez &c. But the articles tend toward opinions that are written as rants - and though they might be the start of good research - they are not developed. The biases of the site are so heavily pitched that hardly anyone will take it seriously. Thus the articles are best paired with better examples of reports and evidence.

      When trying to develop an argument for - say the Israeli lobby abuse of Corbyn - the audience for that argument will only take you seriously if they respect your approaches, your use of evidence, and your way of balancing the argument. One can put together a long list of unwarranted attacks against Corbyn by the Israeli lobby, and develop a good argument for that. He and others merely supported Palestinians. There is absolutely nothing wrong with this, by any standard, even among many Jews (supposedly). But Corbyn was also holding his party back when he did not respond appropriately to those accusations. You have to fight fire with fire. He was appropriately criticized as a useless politician. I like him, but when he failed to take on the Tories in his 1st year, he should have stepped down and let another person have a go. He's a good person but a terrible poitician and leader. To be fair, the person who followed him wasn't much better. The UK news media chewed them both up and spit them out. Boris and other politicians have had a way of dealing with this news media, which is essential for politicians. They do so by making deals, developing support, and by working 24/7 on PR. And - try not to piss off too many who are aligned with the powerful opposition and Israeli lobby. It's like navigating through a political gauntlet.

      Empirestrikesblack.com adds to the discussion, but offers only one side of the argument, without doing the necessary legwork to for some of the imporant the evidence. Why is this? Because they don't have to do this for their particular audience. Politics is now so polarized that websites like this can manage with their respective audiences, without trying to improve their articles for a wider audience. The are useful, however, for starting, or adding to, the broader conversation.

      [–]Jesus 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

      I wanted to know; do you believe the offical story of 9/11? Do you believe Zionism and specific Jews tied to the Likud and Mossad had a hand in 9/11?

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

      I don't believe the official 9/11 story

      I think Mossad has been engaged with several aspects of US foreign policy and military engagements, because their official connections with the CIA &c, but it's very difficult to explain. I think one can locate legitimate circumstantial evidence, dating back to Kissinger.

      [–]Jesus 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

      Do you believe that muslim hijackers flew planes into buildings? And that three buildings collapsed globally at near free fall speed due to the 'inevitable collapse sequence' and thermal expansion?'

      [–]yoke 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

      i think you've got some good poitns. but unless you get it across the isle it's basically, well, essentially no more than an echo chamber.

      based on the parler ban, i suppose gab users are going to listen more to your points, that is, assuming you're left leaning.

      are gab users stubborn in your opinion? cause if ppl are just dumb, there are ways to persuade them. unless someone as smart as you have already done it and they keep a vigilent watch on anyone else to do the same thing. but if dumb ppl are stubborn as well, then i'd stay away from them. (unless i can use their highly predictable way of acting to my advantage, that is.)

      [–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

      I see your points, but I think I am getting plenty information from the right and alt right on Saidit, and would not want to overdo it (for my own sanity). For example, there was a study years ago of groups watghing Fox News, and groups not watching that Fox, so that the IQ scores were tested before and after watching the two different kinds of news. Those who watched Fox had lower IQ scored after a period of a few weeks. I wish I could find the link to this. If I can find it, I'll return and post it here.

      I also think that many Saiditors are not as extreme as those on gab. But the real benefit of Saidit - over Reddit, Gab, and other websites - is that it's small enough for discussions and debates, in a manner that one cannot engage at the other sites.

      [–]yoke 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

      sure, love saidit dude