That was a good phrase but poorly employed. What I meant by it is that when you're debating someone, and I think we've all experienced this, one side may be calm, careful, and logical and then begins to dismantle the other side's claims or beliefs and instead of a rational and cogent response the other side simply repeats the same assertions louder and louder.
They cling to their beliefs despite strong evidence contradicting it, and without a leg to stand on, they double down and merely increase the volume of their claim as if it becomes more true if they shout it more passionately.
That's how I feel about a lot of these, not all, protesters.
That's what I meant.
But a nice if not rather obvious "gotcha" on me. Thanks guys.
That's in the same line of other criticisms in this thread.
I write in a stream-of-consciousness way. I don't edit or reread until someone says something like this. And I usually write late at night with a buzz. So those without vice feel free to cast stones.
You've got it backwards.
The racists are the true victims.
You can get rope burns doing a lynching. Makes it hard to masturbate afterwards.
And yes, that's a nasty thing to write, but not nearly as nasty as Zilla's daily affirmations.
Laz, I missed you and your nonsense. You're an incredibly powerful insulter, and equally shallow in the depth of your analysis. Thanks for displaying it every time you type. There should be an award for this level of human ignorance.
You ain't got nothing on that caveman bro. Stone Age for days. Laz represent
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Soul Zilla said:
HarveyCanal said:
I had a long winded thoughtful response for you, but in the end, all I really want to say is: die, bitch. Seriously.
Don't front Harvey tell me how you really feel.
I wish you a long productive life.
In your quest to avoid implicating all whites of racism, you are in effect sticking up for those whites who are not just racist but murderously racist. And that is just stupidly, heinously wrong. PERIOD.
I had a long winded thoughtful response for you, but in the end, all I really want to say is: die, bitch. Seriously.
Don't front Harvey tell me how you really feel.
I wish you a long productive life.
In your quest to avoid implicating all whites of racism, you are in effect sticking up for those whites who are not just racist but murderously racist. And that is just stupidly, heinously wrong. PERIOD.
That's not my quest. By what means are you able to know the subjective thoughts of another? Are you a mind reader? A psychic? Would you like me to buy a pencil from your cup?
You've got it backwards.
The racists are the true victims.
You can get rope burns doing a lynching. Makes it hard to masturbate afterwards.
And yes, that's a nasty thing to write, but not nearly as nasty as Zilla's daily affirmations.
Laz, I missed you and your nonsense. You're an incredibly powerful insulter, and equally shallow in the depth of your analysis. Thanks for displaying it every time you type. There should be an award for this level of human ignorance.
You ain't got nothing on that caveman bro. Stone Age for days. Laz represent
I refute you thusly.
(Stomps on Zilla's overstuffed head.)
You are not worth the time it takes for subtlety, little man. wrapping your racism in academic tones doesn't hide what you are. You're a motherfucking slug in need of a good salting.
It's not racist to say skin color doesn't matter. It is racist to say that it does.
so science explains how one large group of people systematically oppressed another large group of people in endlessly fucked up ways over the course of several centuries, but let's just ignore the racism that resulted from that and say skin color doesn't matter.
Out of curiosity - are people engaging this poster for sport or off a sliver of hope of getting it to agree with you?
(not counting LB who is providing picture boards for all the blah blah blah)
i think it's sport, guy is a complete asshole and a moron to boot, even though he obviously has some sort of education. the phrase "educated fool" springs to mind. confirmed troll and fellow asshole Moelarryandjesus is even getting in on the action. fuck these awful people, then again there is so little action here these days...where is vintageinfants you need him?
i think it's sport, guy is a complete asshole and a moron to boot, even though he obviously has some sort of education. the phrase "educated fool" springs to mind. confirmed troll and fellow asshole Moelarryandjesus is even getting in on the action. fuck these awful people, then again there is so little action here these days...where is vintageinfants you need him?
Anyhow, what's good, Bassie?
Long time no shit, crappy. Have you finished "Goodnight, Moon" yet?
Dude isn't ignorant - that would imply that more information would change his mind. He's just got a worldview/ideology that is, um, distinctive compared to many of us. Any more information you pour into him will likely be sorted into his worldview just fine, thanks (and unless you're a strong critical thinker, you're probably doing a bit that yourself on the issues of the day... it's a form of confirmation bias).
Dude isn't ignorant - that would imply that more information would change his mind. He's just got a worldview/ideology that is, um, distinctive compared to many of us. Any more information you pour into him will likely be sorted into his worldview just fine, thanks (and unless you're a strong critical thinker, you're probably doing a bit that yourself on the issues of the day... it's a form of confirmation bias).
Dude isn't ignorant - that would imply that more information would change his mind. He's just got a worldview/ideology that is, um, distinctive compared to many of us. Any more information you pour into him will likely be sorted into his worldview just fine, thanks (and unless you're a strong critical thinker, you're probably doing a bit that yourself on the issues of the day... it's a form of confirmation bias).
Big words dont mean shit.
i don't get it.
he's still dead wrong on the issue (imo) but just don't expect to convince him on that is all i'm saying.
i think it's sport, guy is a complete asshole and a moron to boot, even though he obviously has some sort of education. the phrase "educated fool" springs to mind. confirmed troll and fellow asshole Moelarryandjesus is even getting in on the action. fuck these awful people, then again there is so little action here these days...where is vintageinfants you need him?
Anyhow, what's good, Bassie?
Wow, I like you and your posts, what specifically do you hate about me?
I think your bandwagon on this. Unless you toe the line here, it seems my thoughts will be marginalized without thorough analysis then cast into a bin of "well he seems to have a point here or there but his thesis puts me off from the get go so down the drain" if that's how you feel then that's how you feel.
I will frame my criticism more carefully in the future. It bothers me that some old heads think I'm disrupting modern discourse.
Sorry crabmongerfunk that's not what I'm doing. Thanks for the knowledge you drop on records
Dude isn't ignorant - that would imply that more information would change his mind. He's just got a worldview/ideology that is, um, distinctive compared to many of us. Any more information you pour into him will likely be sorted into his worldview just fine, thanks (and unless you're a strong critical thinker, you're probably doing a bit that yourself on the issues of the day... it's a form of confirmation bias).
The single best reply yet, yes I may be wrong, yes I have confirmation bias, yes I am human.
But no my worldview isn't solid, it can change. And has changed and will undoubtedly change in the future. As long as it morphs with the data.
The point is that data is hidden sometimes and othertimes distorted. And that the media has an agenda, that changes periodically and It's hard to decipher.
And that a skeptical voice needs to always be present to separate the wheat from the chaff
I used to think LM&J had an original insult/boast style.
Dudes posts read like Donald Trump transcripts.
I don't pretend to know what LM&J is about but to equate me with Trump is a continental stretch. I'm ashamed of Trump, he's the last person I'd vote for.
I was cordial to you, but now you're the asshole. I won't devolve into name calling, but the record will show your true self.
Also guys I want the truth, I seek the truth, yet I'm presented with conflicting stories from the media.
And the things you hear about all seem to follow the same line. I'm not a news media guru but I could definitely make a page to link up to the other news.
And I could make my own channel to bring news stories you don't hear because of the agenda. All links, and embedded video, that's all.
No bias just the facts. It will be exhausting because of the write up. So many cases, but eye-opening. Some one will sort the data for me?
I used to think LM&J had an original insult/boast style.
Dudes posts read like Donald Trump transcripts.
I don't pretend to know what LM&J is about but to equate me with Trump is a continental stretch. I'm ashamed of Trump, he's the last person I'd vote for.
I was cordial to you, but now you're the asshole. I won't devolve into name calling, but the record will show your true self.
Dude, read up on your read ups.
LMJ is an old handle of Laz.Oblong, so LW's flame be aimed there in the above quote.
If this in an example of your science/data technique, maybe it's time to re-examine your methods.
As my colleague Brentin Mock points out, to observe that homicides began increasing in St. Louis before the protests is not to make a subjective interpretation, but to offer a knowable and verifiable fact. If the “Ferguson Effect” is real, how can it be that it started before the Ferguson protests?
Neglecting this question is neither dispassionate nor high-minded. It is the sort of insidious “false equivalence” that so rightly irks my colleague James Fallows. “False equivalence” runs contrary to the mission to journalism—it obscures where journalists are charged with clarifying. A reasonable person could read the Times’ story and conclude that there is as much proof for the idea that protests against police brutality caused crime to rise, as there is against it. That is the path away from journalism and toward noncommittal stenography: Some people think climate change is real, some do not. Some people believe in UFOs, others doubt their existence. Some think brain cancer can be cured with roots and berries, but others say proof has yet to emerge.
As my colleague Brentin Mock points out, to observe that homicides began increasing in St. Louis before the protests is not to make a subjective interpretation, but to offer a knowable and verifiable fact. If the “Ferguson Effect” is real, how can it be that it started before the Ferguson protests?
Neglecting this question is neither dispassionate nor high-minded. It is the sort of insidious “false equivalence” that so rightly irks my colleague James Fallows. “False equivalence” runs contrary to the mission to journalism—it obscures where journalists are charged with clarifying. A reasonable person could read the Times’ story and conclude that there is as much proof for the idea that protests against police brutality caused crime to rise, as there is against it. That is the path away from journalism and toward noncommittal stenography: Some people think climate change is real, some do not. Some people believe in UFOs, others doubt their existence. Some think brain cancer can be cured with roots and berries, but others say proof has yet to emerge.
Interesting, I love the Atlantic, quality journalism. I Will delve deeper. I'm not beyond reproach, please trip me up, if you do I'll come with a concession, if not I'll press my point further.
Right now I cannot give a sober reply. But the Atlantic has been solid. Would it be fucked up if I rebutted your article with an article from the same publication?
I used to think LM&J had an original insult/boast style.
Dudes posts read like Donald Trump transcripts.
I don't pretend to know what LM&J is about but to equate me with Trump is a continental stretch. I'm ashamed of Trump, he's the last person I'd vote for.
I was cordial to you, but now you're the asshole. I won't devolve into name calling, but the record will show your true self.
Dude, read up on your read ups.
LMJ is an old handle of Laz.Oblong, so LW's flame be aimed there in the above quote.
If this in an example of your science/data technique, maybe it's time to re-examine your methods.
To answer Soul Zilla's commentary, I will make several points. First, I will say that senseless killing is an atrocity no matter the demographic membership of the perpetrator or victim(s). So, I do not condone nor defend in any way the killing of innocent people. Second, I will agree with his point that the Black community does need to behave with decorum when it comes to interactions with the police. Black folks have been educating their children for eons about this irrefutable fact, as not being respectful can lead to violence against them and death.
Now, that I have established my ideological baseline (i.e., killing innocent people is wrong and Black folks should behave politely with police), I will depart from Soul Zilla on the following point. The simple fact of the matter is that institutional racism is the reason why Blacks (and other disparaged folks) react negatively to police scrutiny. There has been a legacy of police mistreatment of minorities so, of course, there is distrust between minorities and the police. More importantly, there is documented research evidence in criminology of the following racial-ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system. Relative to Whites, statistically, Blacks tend to experience more use-of-force (including deadly) by the police (Bureau of Justice Statistics, "Police-Public Contact" Survey, 2008), and are given longer prison sentence for identical crimes (Doerner & Demuth, 2010 in Justice Quarterly). These statistics provide some explanation for why there are negative citizen-police relationships in the Black community.
Finally, as I remarked about 8 years ago, Blumer's (1958) realistic group threat theory would predict that (some) Whites would respond negatively to the election of a Black president. This occurs because there are some Whites who feel that the election of a Black president symbolizes encroachment by the lower-status group into a position more legitimately held by higher-status group members (i.e., Whites). The result, Blumer predicted, is higher incidences of racial discrimination. Not surprisingly, there has been an upswing in police shootings (and killings) of Black citizens during President Obama's presidency. Moreover, research suggests that police tend to be higher in right-wing authoritarianism (i.e., an ideology that supports obedience to authority, conventionalist thought, etc.) (Gatto, Dambrun, Kerbrat, & De Oliveira's 2010 article in European Journal of Social Psychology, and Kappeler, Sluder, & Alpert's 1998 book "Forces of deviance: Understanding the dark side of policing"), which is strongly correlated with social dominance orientation (SDO). People who are high in SDO tend to support the maintenance of the social hierarchy wherein some groups (i.e., Whites) have higher status than other groups (i.e., minorities). High SDO people also have more negative attitudes toward disparaged groups such as women, minorities, lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered individuals, and the disabled (see work by James Sidanius, Felecia Pratto, Shana Levin, and Lawrence Bobo on the topic) . So, the trends we are witnessing in regards to the above issues are strongly predicted by prior theory and research.
Peace,
Big Stacks from Kakalak
I'm tempted to challenge you on facts. Not the academic credentials that you flaunt promiscuously and with out abandon, please tell us how learned you are, must you repeat it ad nauseum?
Can you address posts without citing your academic credentials? I'm Sure you are who you say you are, but the discourse gets muddled real quick.
And some people become Mesmerized real quick, and here we are...
Comments
That was a good phrase but poorly employed. What I meant by it is that when you're debating someone, and I think we've all experienced this, one side may be calm, careful, and logical and then begins to dismantle the other side's claims or beliefs and instead of a rational and cogent response the other side simply repeats the same assertions louder and louder.
They cling to their beliefs despite strong evidence contradicting it, and without a leg to stand on, they double down and merely increase the volume of their claim as if it becomes more true if they shout it more passionately.
That's how I feel about a lot of these, not all, protesters.
That's what I meant.
But a nice if not rather obvious "gotcha" on me. Thanks guys.
That's in the same line of other criticisms in this thread.
I write in a stream-of-consciousness way. I don't edit or reread until someone says something like this. And I usually write late at night with a buzz. So those without vice feel free to cast stones.
Don't front Harvey tell me how you really feel.
I wish you a long productive life.
Has a growing collection of human ears.
Souvenirs from his "scientific method" soirees.
Laz, I missed you and your nonsense. You're an incredibly powerful insulter, and equally shallow in the depth of your analysis. Thanks for displaying it every time you type. There should be an award for this level of human ignorance.
You ain't got nothing on that caveman bro. Stone Age for days. Laz represent
In your quest to avoid implicating all whites of racism, you are in effect sticking up for those whites who are not just racist but murderously racist. And that is just stupidly, heinously wrong. PERIOD.
That's not my quest. By what means are you able to know the subjective thoughts of another? Are you a mind reader? A psychic? Would you like me to buy a pencil from your cup?
I refute you thusly.
(Stomps on Zilla's overstuffed head.)
You are not worth the time it takes for subtlety, little man. wrapping your racism in academic tones doesn't hide what you are. You're a motherfucking slug in need of a good salting.
so science explains how one large group of people systematically oppressed another large group of people in endlessly fucked up ways over the course of several centuries, but let's just ignore the racism that resulted from that and say skin color doesn't matter.
I think I got it.
(not counting LB who is providing picture boards for all the blah blah blah)
Anyhow, what's good, Bassie?
Long time no shit, crappy. Have you finished "Goodnight, Moon" yet?
Dudes posts read like Donald Trump transcripts.
Trump's spiel has been analyzed and found to be worded at a third grade level, so I'm wondering who is reading those transcripts to you.
Big words dont mean shit.
i don't get it.
he's still dead wrong on the issue (imo) but just don't expect to convince him on that is all i'm saying.
Can I say the n-word now?
Not funny.
Now you go.
Wow, I like you and your posts, what specifically do you hate about me?
I think your bandwagon on this. Unless you toe the line here, it seems my thoughts will be marginalized without thorough analysis then cast into a bin of "well he seems to have a point here or there but his thesis puts me off from the get go so down the drain" if that's how you feel then that's how you feel.
I will frame my criticism more carefully in the future. It bothers me that some old heads think I'm disrupting modern discourse.
Sorry crabmongerfunk that's not what I'm doing. Thanks for the knowledge you drop on records
The single best reply yet, yes I may be wrong, yes I have confirmation bias, yes I am human.
But no my worldview isn't solid, it can change. And has changed and will undoubtedly change in the future. As long as it morphs with the data.
The point is that data is hidden sometimes and othertimes distorted. And that the media has an agenda, that changes periodically and It's hard to decipher.
And that a skeptical voice needs to always be present to separate the wheat from the chaff
I don't pretend to know what LM&J is about but to equate me with Trump is a continental stretch. I'm ashamed of Trump, he's the last person I'd vote for.
I was cordial to you, but now you're the asshole. I won't devolve into name calling, but the record will show your true self.
And the things you hear about all seem to follow the same line. I'm not a news media guru but I could definitely make a page to link up to the other news.
And I could make my own channel to bring news stories you don't hear because of the agenda. All links, and embedded video, that's all.
No bias just the facts. It will be exhausting because of the write up. So many cases, but eye-opening. Some one will sort the data for me?
Dude, read up on your read ups.
LMJ is an old handle of Laz.Oblong, so LW's flame be aimed there in the above quote.
If this in an example of your science/data technique, maybe it's time to re-examine your methods.
http://www.theatlantic.com/notes/2015/09/there-is-no-ferguson-effect/403132/
Interesting, I love the Atlantic, quality journalism. I Will delve deeper. I'm not beyond reproach, please trip me up, if you do I'll come with a concession, if not I'll press my point further.
Right now I cannot give a sober reply. But the Atlantic has been solid. Would it be fucked up if I rebutted your article with an article from the same publication?
No sir it is not, but thanks for informing me.
I'm tempted to challenge you on facts. Not the academic credentials that you flaunt promiscuously and with out abandon, please tell us how learned you are, must you repeat it ad nauseum?
Can you address posts without citing your academic credentials? I'm Sure you are who you say you are, but the discourse gets muddled real quick.
And some people become Mesmerized real quick, and here we are...