Hate Facts - Things that are undeniably true but step beyond the mainstream Overton Window

submitted by [deleted] from self.whatever

https://archive.fo/LRe05

A starter pack, if you will. These facts in isolation mean nothing, but they have been censored off the face of the internet since before there were www sites, this is not a recent development. One can't make good determinations about how to approach various problems when they lack facts upon which to base those determinations. Facts which run contrary to the prevailing orthodoxy are and have been suppressed for decades.

all 9 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]anarchy753 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Kind of interesting but annoyingly fixated on facts that affect America only.

Also not seeing how some of these are non-PC, like supporting attacks on American soldiers in other countries. Like if you asked me I'd probably say you have justification on attacking an occupying force in your own country. But what, cos it's against Americans that's not ok?

[–]meatball4u 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

There's a lot of muslim facts and gypsy facts too

[–]anarchy753 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yes, but a lot of them is "Muslims think X about americans" rather than general opinions towards other countries as a whole.

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

Are these peer reviewed? Otherwise they're basically equivalent to opinions. I looked at one study that was supposed to support the idea that 99.8 percent of gays and bisexuals changed their orientation back to heterosexual within 13 years and the Abstract of the study said verbatim: "Results indicated that same-sex attractions became more stable over time, whereas both-sex attraction remained unstable even into adulthood" which is not the same as gay and bisexual people changing their orientation back to straight within 13 years. I haven't looked at them all, but it's a lot of information to go through and check, it might take me some time.

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

Many are peer reviewed. Some aren't. A site called Altbase started up to quality check these sorts of politically inconvenient claims, statistics, and facts. You might want to check it out. http://altbase.net/ClaimView

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

In your original post you claim these facts are undeniably true. Do you still stand by that? Thank you for the link, I am interested to read more.

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

That's the definition of Hate Facts. I stand by it being a good definition.

Not all sources in this old archive are fantastic though, because it hasn't gone through a culling process. So, I'd verify each before using. In my experience this archive is about 95% peer reviewed journals and government statistics, those are solid. Unfortunately many of the (linked) peer reviewed articles, or newspaper clips (that referenced the peer reviewed sources) have since been censored or purged for wrong-think. With the internet archive now in danger of being destroyed, many of these items may fall into the memory hole forever in the near future.

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

Very specifically regarding this claim and evidence for example it says "99.8% of lesbian, gay and bisexual teens will change their sexual orientation within 13 years. Source: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26048483" but when you click on the study and read the abstract it says that same-sex attraction remains stable or becomes more stable in adulthood. So this is an example of the claim and source being at odds with one another. Should I just accept all of these as having been fact checked and or from peer reviewed sources?

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

Weird title. Don't know why whoever compiled them choose it and the Twitter handle.

I agree that

These facts in isolation mean nothing

I suppose most of them are not what progressives want you to believe, but I don't know how deep in the weeds most people get before they form their opinions. Not a lot of first principles thinking going on in this world.