Mainstream article

[Paradoxical]

Because modern media has their news filled with editorializing. It's rare to see a news outlet that just reports the facts. Tbh, the only one that does a good job at straight reporting is the Epoch Times, and the left hates them but, just go read their articles, they are very straight forward.

Yep. The left demonizes anyone that doesn’t believe in Marxism today.

 

[jaeger19]

Demonstrate the difference between an opinion piece and any news article.

Why?.
He can demonstrate the difference between a news piece..opinion or otherwise..
And published scientific research.
That's what we are talking about.

 

[jaeger19]

Yep. The left demonizes anyone that doesn’t believe in Marxism today.

You do realize you " demonize" the left ?.
On the say so of the religious right...
(" demons".."demonize" Mr. Anti christian.... lmao)).

 

[Paradoxical]

Why?.
He can demonstrate the difference between a news piece..opinion or otherwise..
And published scientific research.
That's what we are talking about.

You mean like all the failed science of global warming over the past 50 years?

 

[Paradoxical]

You do realize you " demonize" the left ?.
On the say so of the religious right...
(" demons".."demonize" Mr. Anti christian.... lmao)).

Change your political lean please. Stop the pretense.

 

[jaeger19]

Change your political lean please. Stop the pretense.

You are welcome to explain in detail why I should change my lean.
We have been through this. You keep failing.

 

[jaeger19]

You mean like all the failed science of global warming over the past 50 years?

Aww Paradox.
Failed science?
Tell you what.. how about in another thread you take a research study on global climate change
A peer reviewed study and you critique it and say why it's " failed science"
Just one.
Let's start there..and then we can go through all the research you say is failed.

Start a thread and let me know.

 

[Paradoxical]

Aww Paradox.
Failed science?
Tell you what.. how about in another thread you take a research study on global climate change
A peer reviewed study and you critique it and say why it's " failed science"
Just one.
Let's start there..and then we can go through all the research you say is failed.

Start a thread and let me know.

Like looking at the claim that masks “work“ and no one says what “work” means, there have been numerous scientists and politicians and other hacks saying first it was global cooling and then when science was wrong they said “Oh, WAIT“ we mean global warming and when those prognosticators were wrong they changed it to climate change which means anything.

science is routinely wrong and like evangelicals predicting the second coming they keep changing the date. Every hurricane or heavy snow or tornado is climate change now.

 

[jaeger19]

Like looking at the claim that masks “work“ and no one says what “work” means, there have been numerous scientists and politicians and other hacks saying first it was global cooling and then when science was wrong they said “Oh, WAIT“ we mean global warming and when those prognosticators were wrong they changed it to climate change which means anything.

science is routinely wrong and like evangelicals predicting the second coming they keep changing the date. Every hurricane or heavy snow or tornado is climate change now.

Well. Tons of people said " what work" means.
But the research.. the research " explicit described what "worked " meant.

But think on this paradox..
Yep..we do know science gets things wrong. You know how?
Certainly not from your right wing Christian masters who couldn't read a science paper if they had to.
We know science " got it wrong" FROM OTHER SCIENTISTS. Because that's the nature of science to question the results ..see if theyy are reproducible. Question the methods.. question the validity..
Etc.
Certainly not your way where you refuse to read the scientific research.!!

So Paradox stop being a right wing rube.
Start trying to read the scientific studies on climate change.

 

[Paradoxical]

Well. Tons of people said " what work" means.
But the research.. the research " explicit described what "worked " meant.

But think on this paradox..
Yep..we do know science gets things wrong. You know how?
Certainly not from your right wing Christian masters who couldn't read a science paper if they had to.
We know science " got it wrong" FROM OTHER SCIENTISTS. Because that's the nature of science to question the results ..see if theyy are reproducible. Question the methods.. question the validity..
Etc.
Certainly not your way where you refuse to read the scientific research.!!

So Paradox stop being a right wing rube.
Start trying to read the scientific studies on climate change.

They got it wrong because they are ideologues

 

[jaeger19]

They got it wrong because they are ideologues

Um no.. they are not.
In fact paradox..often science find out its wrong...FROM THE SAME RESEARCHERS that redid an experiment or continued research as they had access to more data..
And published papers that refuted what they had found earlier.

This often happens when a relationship might appear..which is promising..then a larger ( more expensive ) study is done by the same researcher..and the original effect was found to be an anomaly because of small sample size.

No I am afraid the ideologue here is you.

 

[Paradoxical]

Um no.. they are not.
In fact paradox..often science find out its wrong...FROM THE SAME RESEARCHERS that redid an experiment or continued research as they had access to more data..
And published papers that refuted what they had found earlier.

This often happens when a relationship might appear..which is promising..then a larger ( more expensive ) study is done by the same researcher..and the original effect was found to be an anomaly because of small sample size.

No I am afraid the ideologue here is you.

Science is more often than your idol Fausti

 

[jaeger19]

Science is more often than your idol Fausti

Wtf are you trying to say?.

Science is more often?.

By the way..as stated I never followed fauci etc. Didn't need to. I can read and understand scientific medical research.

 

[Paradoxical]

Wtf are you trying to say?.

Science is more often?.

By the way..as stated I never followed fauci etc. Didn't need to. I can read and understand scientific medical research.

Your premise that they are willing to change their findings when new information is forthcoming is like saying CNN is frequently wrong but when someone proves it they silently change their opinions.

 

[jaeger19]

Your premise that they are willing to change their findings when new information is forthcoming is like saying CNN is frequently wrong but when someone proves it they silently change their opinions.

Um no
First..they don't " change their finding".
You don't go back and change your data or findings.
What happens is that tge same researchers do another study..often to see if a larger study produces the same result.
And they publish that even though it refutes the prior study. It's what happens.

Second.. peer reviewed literature is not like CNN.

 

[snakestretcher]

Demonstrate the difference between an opinion piece and any news article.

Seriously? Opinions are by their very nature purely subjective, unlike news reports which are objective and generally supported by verifiable facts. I don't include the likes of tabloid comics like the New York Post, or sensationalist rags like our Daily Mail which are quite happy to publish misinformation and easily debunked lies.

 

[Paradoxical]

Seriously? Opinions are by their very nature purely subjective, unlike news reports which are objective and generally supported by verifiable facts. I don't include the likes of tabloid comics like the New York Post, or sensationalist rags like our Daily Mail which are quite happy to publish misinformation and easily debunked lies.

I don't think the poster meant "in theory" but the difference between some clown on BBC, MSNBS, The NY Times, WaPo and the average carpenter or bricklayer who blogs on the side.

 

[Fishking]

Seriously? Opinions are by their very nature purely subjective, unlike news reports which are objective and generally supported by verifiable facts. I don't include the likes of tabloid comics like the New York Post, or sensationalist rags like our Daily Mail which are quite happy to publish misinformation and easily debunked lies.

Our media largely editorializes it's news, so there is no difference. Btw, your statement that opinion pieces are purely subjective is false. They are often full of actual facts and data. Also hilarious you call the NYPost a tabloid. That says all I need to know which, of course, I already knew with you already.

 

[Paradoxical]

Our media largely editorializes it's news, so there is no difference. Btw, your statement that opinion pieces are purely subjective is false. They are often full of actual facts and data. Also hilarious you call the NYPost a tabloid. That says all I need to know which, of course, I already knew with you already.

We are dealing with the very hard left here. Not just liberals. I suspect many are college educated, elitists, studied womans history or globalism, their professors taught them they were oppressors and guilty of original sin (slavery) and are still living in their parents basement at age 35 and they don't know how to get them the hell out.

 

[Fishking]

We are dealing with the very hard left here. Not just liberals. I suspect many are college educated, elitists, studied womans history or globalism, their professors taught them they were oppressors and guilty of original sin (slavery) and are still living in their parents basement at age 35 and they don't know how to get them the hell out.

Yes, the board is pretty heavily skewed left, including those running it.

 

[Paradoxical]

Yes, the board is pretty heavily skewed left, including those running it.

Agreed on all counts. Can't say anything more for fear of ............you know (words I can't say)

 

[jaeger19]

We are dealing with the very hard left here. Not just liberals. I suspect many are college educated, elitists, studied womans history or globalism, their professors taught them they were oppressors and guilty of original sin (slavery) and are still living in their parents basement at age 35 and they don't know how to get them the hell out.

Hey paradox..are you college educated?

 

[snakestretcher]

Our media largely editorializes it's news, so there is no difference. Btw, your statement that opinion pieces are purely subjective is false. They are often full of actual facts and data. Also hilarious you call the NYPost a tabloid. That says all I need to know which, of course, I already knew with you already.

'Tabloid' refers to the size of the paper it's printed on.

Tabloid size paper - Inkjet and Laser Printers | Graytex Papers

Tabloid size paper is included across most of our paper line of expanded sizes.

www.graytex.com

 

[Paradoxical]

Hey paradox..are you college educated?

NOYB.

I don't tout my education like those who claim to have initials behind their last name.

 

[jaeger19]

NOYB.

I don't tout my education like those who claim to have initials behind their last name.

Well then in what capacity can you speak to what college professors teach???