all 6 comments

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

It's a redneck thing. They think if they shout you down they win.

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

humans ?

as compared to cats ?

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

Doing actual research is a racist part of the evil patriarchy. We have TV and internet researchers who do all the hard work free of charge. Why would any sane person pass up such an invaluable public service?

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

Why do you want people to think? Isn't it better to have 8 billion slaves at your disposal ready to cater to your every whim?

[–]NodeThis is my flair. There are many like it, but this one is mine. 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

'Opinions' might be a little strong, but when you already have a clue about the topic in question, forming a hypothesis before testing its validity can work better than randomly 'throwing shit against the wall to see what sticks'.

Your criteria for what constitutes valid evidence are also critical to formulating an evidence-based opinion that matches actual reality. Look at the climate fakery, for example. Look at election 'results'. Look at Putin's 'unprovoked' attack. Look at the 'female penis', or rather, don't. Going by found-evidence alone can turn the credulous person into a MIC puppet in a fantasy world.

However you arrive at your opinion, it should be verified by testing your evidence against as much actual reality as you can uncover. Unless you're doing hard science though, at the end of the day it's still often a judgement call.

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

THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION, FELLOW HUMAN