you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]BigFatRetard 13 insightful - 4 fun13 insightful - 3 fun14 insightful - 4 fun -  (6 children)

One of the most absurd claims is that there is no evidence, even if you believe Biden won the election legitimately.

Of course there's evidence. It's like thermodynamics -- depending on how you define your system the laws of thermodynamics may not apply because something right outside of your definition is going to pump energy into a system.

Likewise, of course there's evidence of fraud, there's always evidence of stuff, whether it's true or not. You can find photos that are damning, videos that are damning, written reports that are damning. Just because you can find it doesn't mean it's even necessarily true!

That goes to the way the left has turned science into a religion. Anyone who actually applies science knows that sometimes -- even often -- you end up with compelling evidence that suggests something that isn't true. You can end up with a graph that seems to perfectly prove your hypothesis and it turns out there was something else going on that made the data look more compelling than it was. Why do you think the sciences are in a crisis where most studies aren't reproducible? Why do you think that p-hacking is a thing? It's because evidence always exists, and it's just a matter of slicing the evidence to support your conclusion.

You do that if you're begging the question, but if you're seeking truth then you have to look at all the evidence, weigh it, and try to come not to the conclusion you want, but the correct conclusion.

Like I said, the claim that there's no evidence is simply proof that you aren't looking. It's offensive to anyone who is seeking truth.

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

Great comment.

[–]C3P0 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I hate when people lump together real science with things that should be considered in an entirely different category such as psychology and behavioral sciences.

If a study isn't reproducible, revoke the masters' degrees and PhDs that were awarded based on the study--nah, they won't do that; it's more about the illusion of prestige than truth.

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

Great comment.

The strategy of the establishment power structure is now clear.

They don't care about what evidence exists. They care about only one thing: Whose "evidence" is it? If the evidence comes from an "approved" source, then it will be promoted. If the evidence comes from someone they don't like - for any of a million reasons, most completely invalid - then it is "misinformation".

That's their entire strategy now. Because it's so simple, it's also pretty easy to see through. Thus the established power structure is bleeding the control they have remaining at such a rate that chaos is not far off.

What comes next? Beyond my pay-grade...

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

barr said there's no evidence of widespread fraud that would have changed the result of the election. Sure there was minor fraud like a guy voting for a dead person, here or there, like in every election, just not enough to change the result, so why worry about it.

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

Is that what Barr said...or is that what TASS West wants you to believe he said?

https://www.dailywire.com/news/doj-fires-back-at-news-orgs-claiming-voter-fraud-probes-are-over-thats-not-what-ag-barr-said

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

first one