1541

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 24, 2020, 08:14:18 AM »

Right. And this is the exact point.
People hang on the every word of this YouTube channel which keeps on posting videos with titles including the words “HUGE!!!” or “BOMBSHELL!!!”.

And it’s not that everything the videos say is untrue, it’s just that they’re not significant.

Yes, Texas did go to the Supreme Court. Yes, a lot of other States did go #MeToo. But it wasn’t HUGE. It wasn’t a BOMBSHELL. Plenty of people tried to tell Tom that it was going nowhere. But no, his cherry picked “expert” said what he wanted to hear and that was good enough for him. And how did that turn out?

Surely at some point people have to realise that this dude is full of shit. Biden is President Elect, within a month he will be President. That’s what is happening in the real world. Living in a fantasy world and pretending it’s not happening isn’t going to change that.

1542

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 23, 2020, 09:28:54 PM »

J-Man. Explain why the Presidential election was “stolen” but the Senate one - where the Republicans actually did pretty well - was not.
Why steal one part and the completely hobble yourself by losing ground in the Senate thus limiting the effect a Democrat President can actually have.
They were on the same ballots so why not rig both parts?

1543

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 23, 2020, 08:55:50 PM »

Nope. It happened. The Georgia State Senate Judiciary committee recommended the decertification of the electors in Georgia.

J-Man posted a second source on the topic.

Yes. A second source which he has consistently referenced over the last month and has consistently been unreliable.

And even if “it” happened, what is the significance? You have spent the last month getting excited about one thing or another - probably because you’re being fed nonsense from YouTube channels like this.

Remember how you said it was a good thing they kept losing in the lower courts because it gave Trump a route to the SCOTUS?

Remember how excited you got about Texas taking the case to the SCOTUS? You excitedly chuckled about how many other States joined. People kept trying to tell you it was going nowhere but you kept citing cherry picked  “experts” who backed up your views.
How did that go?

How long are you going to keep flailing around like this?

1544

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 23, 2020, 10:05:12 AM »

I guess they don't want you to know the truth. The Georgia State Senate Judiciary committee is officially recommending the decertification of the electors in Georgia.

I went through that dude's YouTube channel. This are the titles of a selection of his videos in chronological order

2nd Nov Far Left FREAKS OUT as GOP SURGES and Trump Approval SKYROCKETS!!!
3rd Nov LAST MINUTE PANIC! Biden Campaign GIVES UP on FLORIDA and PENNSYLVANIA!!!
6th Nov Why Trump Will TRIUMPH in PA and WIN the ELECTION!!!
9th Nov The COMEBACK BEGINS as President Trump Goes on the OFFENSIVE!!!
10th Nov ‘WE WILL WIN’ as Coming REVELATIONS May SHOCK THE WORLD!!!
12th Nov BREAKING! Pennsylvania Court RULES for TRUMP! BALLOTS THROWN OUT!!!
13th Nov MI and PA on VERGE of FLIPPING to TRUMP as Pundit Warns ‘Things are About to EXPLODE’!!!
16th Nov Lawyers Predict ELECTION Will Be OVERTURNED! Evidence Will SHOCK the Nation!!!
17th Nov STUNNING EVIDENCE May OVERTURN Election as NV TOSSES 153K Ballots and Trump Gains in GA!!!
19th Nov TRUMP RELEASES THE KRAKEN! ‘We Are Taking Our Country BACK’!!!
23rd Nov CNN PANICS as Vote Certification in PA and MI in DOUBT!!!
24th Nov Trump Scores HUGE WINS in MI and PA as Feckless Republicans Certify FRAUDULENT Votes!!!
24th Nov HUGE! Georgia ORDERS Ballot Audit as Sidney Powell RELEASES THE KRAKEN!!!
30th Nov HUGE Win for Trump as Judge Orders Dominion Voting Machines in Georgia IMPOUNDED!!!
1st Dec BOMBSHELL Hearings in Michigan as Trump Drops MEGATON Lawsuit on Wisconsin!!!
2nd Dec KRAKEN RELEASED! STOP THE STEAL Rally in Georgia AWAKENS a Populist GIANT!!!
3rd Dec IT’S HAPPENING! Trump’s LEGAL TEAM Is Beginning to CLOSE IN on the DEMOCRATS!!!
4th Dec GA Governor Orders BALLOT AUDIT after SHOCKING VIDEO EVIDENCE of FRAUD Emerges!!!
8th Dec Texas Drops BOMBSHELL Lawsuit Challenging ELECTION as Congress Rejects Biden as President-Elect!!!
9th Dec THIS IS THE BIG ONE! The Supreme Court Will DETERMINE the FATE of the 2020 ELECTION!!!
10th Dec BREAKING! Pennsylvania Will JOIN Texas Lawsuit AGAINST Pennsylvania! This is HUGE!!!
14th Dec BREAKING! Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Nevada Electors VOTE FOR TRUMP!!!

Do I need to explain why you continuing to believe people like this is a little silly?
The one on the 9th Dec is my favourite. Remember you were getting all excited about the SCOTUS case? So was he



Hasn't aged well, has it?
Quote from the video "This is the End all, Be All case. This is it. It's going to decide it all"
Hilariously, after the SCOTUS told them to stop wasting their time he did another video explaining why it's not all over, despite him saying in that video that it was the "End all, Be all" case which was "going to decide it all".

TL;DR - you continue to watch and believe sources which tell you what you want to hear no matter how demonstrably wrong they have repeatedly been in the past.

1545

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 21, 2020, 10:56:32 AM »

If you are going to DebOOonK an expert then you have to at least provide a source with credentials of equal or greater relevance.

Says the man who thinks that Rowbotham, a medical doctor, has DebOOonKed centuries of the finest minds in scientific history.
What "credentials of equal or greater relevance" does he have exactly?
I refer you back to my handy graph. The amount you care about someone's qualifications depends entirely on whether what they're saying fits your world view.

Even then, it merely shows that some experts disagree with each other.

Right. So we have one "expert" saying "THE CHANCES OF BIDEN WINNING WERE A BAJILLION TO ONE!!!11!!1!"
And we have another mathematician patiently explaining why that analysis is bogus.
Quite a few actually, multiple sources have now been provided to you. I just thought the video was a good one because he explains it all so clearly.

If you can't be bothered engaging with the actual argument - and your continued failure to do so is noted - then the headlines are the original analysis is based on two premises

1) The voter split in 2020 would be the same as in 2016
2) The "population" of in person voters is the same as mail in voters.

Neither of these is true.

The first one - of course the voter split won't be the same in 2 different elections. That is literally why you have elections every few years because over time people change their minds about things.

The second one - it was known before the election that the on the day in person votes would be skewed towards Trump - because he was telling his supporters to vote in person. And the mail in votes were going to be skewed towards Biden because he was telling his supporters to vote that way.
So saying "Hey! That's odd, what are the chances that the split in vote between Biden and Trump would be different in those two populations, they're people from the same State!" is idiotic.

Of course the split is different because the two parties were encouraging their supporters to vote in different ways.
This was known before the election.

Your inability to understand or engage with the actual argument is not doing you any favours.

1546

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 19, 2020, 11:30:58 PM »

Also a math teacher

Your continued inability to engage with the argument put forward in that video - and the other articles from people explaining why the statistical analysis is bogus - is noted.
As is your inability to explain why only the Presidential election was "stolen" and not the Senate one which was on the same ballots.

1547

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 19, 2020, 09:32:01 PM »

Your definition of “suitable source” is “someone I agree with”

Two direct questions for you:

1) What in the video do you disagree with or dispute?

2) Why would the Democrats “steal” the Presidential election and not steal the Senate one which were on the same ballots

1548

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 19, 2020, 08:31:11 PM »

Does he have a PhD like the person in the original paper?

Dude. You're doing that thing again...
It's interesting how much weight you give to someone's qualifications depending on whether what they're saying backs up your world view or not.



I don't think he has a Ph.D, but you don't need one to understand how woolly headed the analysis is.
I understand it, I'm sure you would too if you took off your MAGA hat and bothered to try and engage with the argument.

Have you actually watched the video? If so then what in it do you disagree with?
Basically the original analysis says "Hey, Trump was ahead by <this amount> then a load more votes were counted. What are the chances that those votes would be different in the Trump/Biden split than the original votes? It's a bajillion to one!"

...Except it isn't a bajillion to one. It was known before the election that the Republicans were encouraging their voters to vote on the day and the Democrats were encouraging their voters to do postal votes. So of course in States where the on the day votes were counted first the initial results would skew in favour of the Republicans. Only when the postal votes were counted would the true picture be known.

The original analysis assumes the split would be the same in those two populations which is false.
You start with a faulty assumption and you're going to draw a faulty conclusion.

Have you figured out why the Democrats stole the presidential election but completely forgot to steal the Senate one which was on the same ballots? Whoopsie!

1549

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide

« on: December 19, 2020, 10:01:57 AM »

the incoming president

Finally!
Pleased to see you’ve reached the “acceptance” stage of grief. Good for you.

1550

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 18, 2020, 06:11:40 PM »

Pretty good explanation here of why that “one in a quadrillion” number cited in the SCOTUS case was nonsense



The headline in is based on false assumptions and thus draws false conclusions.

He mischievously gives another “statistical impossibility” at the end of the video which is bogus. He doesn’t explain why m but it’s pretty obvious why and it’s clearly a bit of a troll from him.

1551

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 17, 2020, 09:43:34 PM »

Trump won.

Not according to the popular vote.
Or the electoral college.
Or the Attorney General.
Or 60 judges, some of whom are Republicans.
Or the Supreme Court, 3 of whom were Trump appointed. Remember how you got all excited about Trump taking things to the SCOTUS because you thought they’d do whatever he said? That didn’t go so well.

But hey, you can keep furiously Googling and looking at your right wing conspiracy sites and denying reality if you must.

1552

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 17, 2020, 12:02:15 PM »

https://consequenceofsound.net/2020/12/atlantic-city-auction-blow-up-trump-casino/?utm_expid=.I2OkZS06Riahk3U0vrA5rQ.0&utm_referrer=

Good times.

Will Trump be in it at the time? If so then I'm happy to chip in 

1553

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 17, 2020, 07:31:27 AM »

"Maria Bartiromo dropped a bomb on her morning show.

Oh wow! This is going to crack the whole thing wide open!
I mean, probably best to not think too hard about the fact that all the other “bombshells” you’ve posted about in the last month have turned out to be damp squibs.
Could be that the sources you’re clinging to aren’t that reliable? Just a thought.

1554

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 16, 2020, 11:24:23 PM »

I would have thought Twitter would have MFA or some such, but Trump’s probably dumb enough not to use it so...who knows. It amused me, anyway.

1555

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 16, 2020, 10:19:01 PM »

The password!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-55337192

lolz

1556

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 16, 2020, 10:16:09 PM »

Finally an arrest in a voter fraud investigation!

https://mobile.twitter.com/MWatkinsTrib/status/1339014417246265345?

It’s happening! #MAGA2020 #FourMoreYears

1557

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Time-lapse of SpaceX dragon capsule docking with ISS

« on: December 16, 2020, 02:13:48 PM »

You're correct - we have 'actual' fakes (Hollywood movies) - which look like the video posted by the OP. Hollywood movies actually look better. So there's one reference frame.

Better by what metric?
I mean, lots of things enhanced by CGI look "better" (shinier, slicker, more impressive) than real life, that doesn't mean real life doesn't exist.

What's yours, based on your experience of seeing space ships dock with other spaceships?

I don't have one, apart from videos like the above.
But I'm not the one making vague claims that this is fake.

We all have a model of reality in our heads. When I saw Jurassic Park I didn't think "Holy shit! Dinosaurs are still alive". Because I know they aren't. But when I see footage like this...I know the ISS exists - you can literally see it from the ground. I know rockets are a thing - I saw a Shuttle launch back in the day. So on what basis would I think this would be faked? For what purpose would it be?

EDIT: You might want to have a go at this quiz
https://area.autodesk.com/fakeorfoto/
I'd be interested to know your score.

1558

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: Time-lapse of SpaceX dragon capsule docking with ISS

« on: December 16, 2020, 10:40:19 AM »

Adding that not only does it look fake to me

So what's your reference frame here? You say it "looks fake". Based on what?
What experience of seeing space ships docks with other space ships do you have which could mean you can accurately assess this?
The only other experience you can possibly have are Hollywood films which actually are fake.
So other than a vague assertion that it "looks fake", which is entirely subjective and not based on much I'm not sure what you're arguing here.

1559

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes

« on: December 16, 2020, 09:14:17 AM »

https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/goodnight-mr-trump-video-goes-viral-as-electoral-college-certifies-joe-biden-president-elect/15/12/

 

1560

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: December 16, 2020, 08:11:29 AM »

I’ll admit I don’t understand all the details of the US system. I know that the electors in a state generally vote for the president who won that state. I know they don’t have to but they generally do and it would do huge damage to democracy in the US if the state votes for Biden and the electors voted for Trump (or vica versa).
Just like over here an MP can change party and I don’t think they have to call a local election when they do, but that is generally what happens.

You seem to be arguing here Tom, that a State which voted for Biden should allow electors in to vote for Trump because
1) It has happened before
2) They don’t like the result
3) You don’t like the result

Now, you might say “it’s not just that I don’t like the result, I believe that my preferred candidate has had the election stolen from him”. Well ok, let’s see your evidence.

In the meme thread you posted something basically saying “there’s loads of evidence”. And I guess you’re right. But when it comes to evidence quality is more important than quantity. Yes there are lots of affidavits but they’re trash. Not just because I say so but because judges are saying so. I think we are up to nearly 60 cases now. Only one has been won and it was nothing to do with fraud. So...yeah.

Your meme mentioned “statistical impossibilities”. Well ok, let’s see them. Because data can be interpreted in many ways and the ludicrous “one in a quadrillion” number in the Supreme Court case was based on a couple of assumptions which aren’t true. If you start with a false premise then you’re going to reach a false conclusion.

So basically all you’re left with now, having been let down over the last month by all the things you’ve got excited about, is hoping that the electoral college defies the will of the people because you don’t like the outcome of the election. And you think you’re the good guys?