"Saturday Night Live - Cut for Time: Dianne Feinstein Message - SNL" Canadians aren't allowed to see this. Americans, please repost on PeerTube or something.

submitted by JasonCarswell from youtube.com

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Maybe later; I haven't got 2% of a day to spend watching a video where people talk at 20% of reading speed.

I kind of meant data and stuff, that you're actually making conclusions based off. The rules for what you're allowed to do with data are clear, so you'd be able to spot my mistakes / invalid conclusions and I yours.

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

You did this when the best 9/11 evidence was handed to you. "I'm not busy enough to doubt you but I'm too busy to look at your evidence."

I watch all my YouTubes at 2x or more. Get the "Enhancer for YouTube" browser addon for great extra features, like going 2.1x, 2.2x, etc. Listen while you do your dishes or whatevs.

That's not a long video and it's not the greatest but it's not remotely bad. It's not proof, but it's much closer with great foundational ideas and as he lays out, it's not really provable but the premise clearly tips the other way.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

"I'm not busy enough to doubt you but I'm too busy to look at your evidence."

Isn't this the essence of the modern web? :-p I can spend time reading, but not watching videos. If videos are really the best evidence, then I doubt it's good evidence. I could understand videos being the best presentation of the evidence, but it's easier to convince people of anything when it's being spoken to them instead of read by them. I like controlling the flow of information into my brain.

I'll doubt, but until I've seen your evidence I'm not going to go brigading onto threads saying "'9/11 was a hoax' was a hoax!"

More relevantly, I asked for evidence. Somebody trying to convince me isn't evidence. Quite frankly, the only evidence for something like climate change is a good set of observational measurements. I don't want to watch a video where somebody interprets stuff for me; give me the raw data and I can:

  • analyse it
  • determine which hypothesis it supports (climate change v.s. null hypothesis)
  • explain why I determined that
  • be told why I am wrong
  • re-examine my analysis
  • goto step 2

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

It's good enough for me. I don't need to please your standards. Refute the evidence and present your own to discuss.

Otherwise you are just trolling for argument sake.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Refute the evidence and present your own to discuss.

Does that include questioning the validity of the evidence in the first place? If that counts as a valid argument, I'm willing to put in the effort to properly engage (as opposed to the relatively low-effort posting I've been doing up until now).

[–]JasonCarswell[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Define questioning.

Define validity.

Define evidence.

Define first place.

Define properly engage.

Define relatively low-effort posting.

Define annoying.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

  • Suggesting that something does not fall within a particular set.
  • The property of being able to be used for its purpose (i.e. as evidence).
  • Information that can be used to produce a true statement.
  • "in the first place" is a turn of phrase, in this case placing the assumption that the evidence is valid as one of the pieces of evidence used to produce the prior.
  • The standard that a reasonable person would consider the minimum required for interaction on this site.
  • A comment taking less than 30 minutes to produce, which does not meet the standard given above.
  • I get it, I get it. I'll try harder in future. (And, by the way, the alternative to "willing to put in the effort to properly engage" will now be "not engage at all", since otherwise it's just noise that wastes everybody's time.)

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

I didn't seriously expect a list.

I just wanted you to taste some of your own confrontational skepticism - about everything. To the point of being annoying.

Ask your questions, but think about how it's being received. Coat it in layers of sugar and honey or whatever. Keep it short and above all friendly.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Will do. Thanks so much!