One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Posts for: acknowledgeurma
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 55 next>>
Sep 14, 2018 15:50:57   #
gaconservative74 wrote:
I never said you know or don’t know anything. I am saying an atheist must own up to the fact that if all is by chance that there is no good and bad and no right and wrong. All is completely and totally relative.

Look, you sound like a fine person and it IS morally right do do what you have said you do, love your wife, raise your kids right, etc, what I’m saying is that as an atheist, you can’t claim it as right or wrong. As Solomon said, all of life is folly apart from God. Really, if there is no God, then all existence really doesn’t matter. There really is no point to anything.


I am depressing myself thinking about it. Lol
I never said you know or don’t know anything. I am... (show quote)

Relevant to this, I found the following:
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/if-there-is-a-god-then-anything-is-permitted/10100616

It sort of delves into the question: Is there good (absolute and eternal), or good is only relative to what God demands of us.
 
Sep 14, 2018 13:14:57   #
byronglimish wrote:
Of course young barry would cower to michael obanana👈 dang spell check and would agree with anything michael says...have you seen the gorilla teeth and linebacker shoulders on that beast??


Sniff...sniff...is that chum I smell? Is Sheldon trolling again?
Sep 14, 2018 13:05:25   #
karpenter wrote:
You've Got A Keyboard
And Plenty Of Time To Goof-Off Here

Why Are You So Lazy And Uninformed
That You Need To Ask Any 'Fact Checker' Anything

Stay On Top Of Current Events
Learn To Chase Imbedded Links To Their Original Source
DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH

Google Is Your Friend....

I don't have plenty of time to goof-off here. I haven't enough time to do all I want (should(must)). So I get on OPP to appear busy, when actually I'm procrastinating making a decision about which important thing to start, by doing something less important than anything else.

It is because, I am lazy and uninformed, that I ask fact checkers. If I were informed I wouldn't need to ask. If I weren't lazy, I might choose to spend all the time and resources it would take to confirm or refute some "fact". But I have a lot fewer resources than Fact checker organizations.

As for looking at original sources, I often do. I am continually amazed at the fine cherry picking that I discover.

You wrote, "Google Is Your Friend...." Because Google uses my search history, the search results have a bias toward my interests. It sort of acts as an echo chamber, kinda like my other friends. Because fact checker organizations provide a service (confirmation or refutation of information), they have an incentive to provide the best service possible. Since I have confidence in free markets, I tend to trust fact checkers that have been around for a while (e.g. Snopes). Snopes is not my friend and sometimes disappoints me by refuting things I wish were true.
Sep 14, 2018 11:22:06   #
mwdegutis wrote:
Operative and vague words suggesting innuendo...I faintly recall...I heard. What I said I ACTUALLY experienced!

"Suggesting innuendo"
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/innuendo
an oblique allusion : hint, insinuation; especially : a veiled or equivocal reflection on character or reputation
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vague
not clearly expressed : stated in indefinite terms vague accusations
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/operative
producing an appropriate effect : efficacious operative techniques

Are you suggesting that I am lying, that I don't ACTUALLY have a faint memory of an experience of some teacher allowing an encyclopedia reference in a paper, that I didn't ACTUALLY hear something about Wikipedia being an acceptable source in cases where other encyclopedias are acceptable?
I suppose it's possible that I am a bot with implanted memories...but how would I know? I would also have an implanted memory of no teachers after middle school allowing encyclopedia references in papers.

Outside of references for papers, I think Wikipedia is as good as (if not better than) any other encyclopedia (and Wikipedia does give disclaimers and asks for improvements).
Sep 14, 2018 09:32:44   #
karpenter wrote:
I Drop The Hubris And Just Get To The Point
Because Your Declarations Are Anecdotal

Re-Read My Posts In This Thread Regarding Snopes
I've Made Myself Clear From The Start

Do Try To Comprehend What You Read

Believe it or not, I do try to comprehend what I read. And try as I might, I'm finding your writing very difficult. Perhaps it's the lack of punctuation. Perhaps it's the beginning capital on each word. I don't recall ever encountering that writing style (it makes me think of the anti-ee cummings).

When you write, "I Drop The Hubris And Just Get To The Point" after quoting my, "You dropped the "many (all?)" when you quoted me", I wonder, will nemesis be chasing after you or me?

On a new line, you wrote, "Because Your Declarations Are Anecdotal". I assume this refers to the previous line. So let me see if I can rephrase what you wrote:
Because my declarations are personal and not based on research, karpenter drops (someone's) excessive pride and gets to the point (that being, Snopes is not to be taken seriously because it has an undeniable progressive bias).

This was in response to my "...many (all?) Trump supporters will tell you Snopes can't be trusted because they belong to George Soros". Now, I suppose that karpenter wants to make it clear that, it is not "because they belong to George Soros", but because Snopes is biased, that karpenter doesn't take Snopes seriously (which is somehow different than karpenter doesn't trust Snopes). I suppose that karpenter might trust Snopes, but think their efforts ludicrous. Is that the case? Perhaps it was the "because they belong to George Soros", that raised karpenter's objection. After all, Snopes does say this is FALSE:
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/was-snopes-busted-ties-to-soros/


As for my declarations being personal and not based on research, did that cause you to "Drop The Hubris", or "Just Get To The Point"? Getting away from my person research (on Trump supporters' trust in Snopes), I would ask, "Has anyone ever met a Trump supporter who trusted Snopes?

Could you possibly make yourself a little clearer?
Sep 13, 2018 22:20:28   #
mwdegutis wrote:
And can you tell me how many people actually read that "disclaimer" before reading on? And the operative words is "Unsourced material MAY be challenged and removed." When I was in school in my late-40s about 15 years ago, we weren't allowed to use Wikipedia as a source. Perhaps things have changed but considering how our institutions of "higher learning" have severely regressed since then I highly doubt it.

I faintly recall, some teachers, for some papers, would not allow references to encyclopedias as support for ideas presented in a paper. I heard recently, that Wikipedia is an acceptable reference, when used where another encyclopedia reference would be acceptable. I think this may be, because the screening process is (becoming?) very careful.
 
Sep 13, 2018 19:21:30   #
Bad Bob wrote:
Ya think she is smarter than trump the lying POS?

I think Barack thinks Michelle is smarter than Barack.
Sep 13, 2018 19:16:49   #
mwdegutis wrote:
Wikipedia and Snopes...helluva combination.

I thought it interesting that the Wikipedia reference was headed with:
"This article does not cite any sources. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. "

Did you disagree with the Wikipedia quote?
Would you prefer:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/discernment
the quality of being able to grasp and comprehend what is obscure

I think I like it more, because it's simpler.

If you don't like Snopes, how determine whether to trust information?
Sep 13, 2018 18:28:08   #
Blade_Runner wrote:
You are talking about the megalomaniac Barack Hussein Obama. No one on earth can match the number of times Hussein referred to himself in all of his speeches and writings.

I think Barack Obama probably thinks Michelle Obama is the smarter of the two (if only because she doesn't seem to want to be POTUS).
Sep 13, 2018 18:18:38   #
karpenter wrote:
Is That What I Just Said
Or Just What You Want To Hear

How Do You Read Highway Signs ??
They're Subject To What You Want Them To Say, Right ??

If Progs Generally Mis-Understand Terms And Concepts
The Way You Seem To, Deliberately Or Not
Then Progs Really Have No Business Running A Country

Let's go back over our little interchange:

<acknowledgeurma wrote>
...[the "..." indicates that something is left out] Snopes says Trump never said this, but then many (all?) Trump supporters will tell you Snopes can't be trusted because they belong to George Soros.

<karpenter wrote partial quote without "...">
Trump supporters will tell you Snopes can't be trusted because they belong to George Soros

<karpenter continued with>
Nope
I Said Snopes Is Not To Be Taken Seriously
Because Their Progressive Slant Is Un-Deniable
And It's Been That Way For More Than The Last Two Years

<acknowledgeurma asked (notice the question mark)>
So you take Snopes seriously when they confirm your point of view, but they're "Not To Be Taken Seriously" when they disagree wit your point of view?

<karpenter responds with>
Is That What I Just Said
Or Just What You Want To Hear

How Do You Read Highway Signs ??
They're Subject To What You Want Them To Say, Right ??

If Progs Generally Mis-Understand Terms And Concepts
The Way You Seem To, Deliberately Or Not
Then Progs Really Have No Business Running A Country

<acknowledgeurma comments on our interchange>
1. You dropped the "many (all?)" when you quoted me. I don't recall ever encountering a Trump supporter who trusted Snopes, that's why I asked "(all?)". But I allowed for the possibility with my "many".
2. You replied with, "Nope[,] I Said Snopes Is Not To Be Taken Seriously...". I don't recall saying you ever said anything. Why did you even respond to my post?
3. But assuming you felt I had somehow misquoted you, I don't understand why you said "Nope". I think most would say: a source of information that "Is Not To Be Taken Seriously", "can't be trusted".
4. I was slightly befuddled as to why you had even replied to my original comment. I assumed you were just another Trump supporter who disregarded any Snopes reports because you perceived a "Progressive Slant" you deem "Un-Deniable". So, I asked if you took Snopes seriously when they confirm your point of view.
5. Again, until now, I don't recall ever saying you ever said anything. And I was only slightly interested in hearing, whether you took Snopes seriously when they confirm your point of view.
6. How do I read highway signs? Are they subject to what I want them to say? Well, yes, I read them as though they were subject to what I want them to say - because: I want them to say information that will get me safely to my destination, and I trust the governments to provide that information with the highway signs.
7. (Based on your use of "You Seem To") It seems you think I "Generally Mis-Understand Terms And Concepts", either deliberately or not. What terms and concepts have I misunderstood?
8. I have no desire for "Running A Country", but I would like to be POTUS. It would be interesting.
9. Why did you begin all your words with a capital?
Sep 13, 2018 16:36:00   #
Shane_E wrote:
Ok ok Snoops says it is false. I must be the dumbest person on the internet😢😢😢

Oh but wait, whats this???
There is a Trump FAMILY member saying he HAS said it

https://www.independent.co.uk/News/world/americas/jared-kushner-donald-trump-lied-base-stupid-voters-supporters-president-son-in-law-white-house-a7764791.html

This is one thing I agree with Trump on.
You repubs really are stupid. This is my last post on this topic.
Sorry Game Over and you LOST 😂😂😂

I'm not so sure how much trust I would put in a third hand report.
But, regarding whether Trump thinks Republicans are stupid, I suspect that Trump thinks that he is the smartest person who ever existed, and so relative to him everyone is stupid.
 
Sep 13, 2018 16:13:57   #
byronglimish wrote:
Just like any other news...Use discernment...Duh!

From:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discernment

"Discernment is the ability to obtain sharp perceptions or to judge well (or the activity of so doing). In the case of judgment, discernment can be psychological or moral in nature. Within judgment, discernment involves going past the mere perception of something and making nuanced judgments about its properties or qualities. Considered as a virtue, a discerning individual is considered to possess wisdom, and be of good judgement; especially so with regard to subject matter often overlooked by others."

So, how does one gain discernment?
Sep 13, 2018 15:20:32   #
karpenter wrote:
Nope
I Said Snopes Is Not To Be Taken Seriously
Because Their Progressive Slant Is Un-Deniable
And It's Been That Way For More Than The Last Two Years

So you take Snopes seriously when they confirm your point of view, but they're "Not To Be Taken Seriously" when they disagree wit your point of view?
Sep 13, 2018 10:04:11   #
Nickolai wrote:
The Republicans controlled both the house and Senate. The Republican House voted to impeach Clinton. The Senate could not muster the necessary 60 votes to Impeach

I think it tales 67 votes to convict on impeachment charges.
Sep 13, 2018 08:39:36   #
Airforceone wrote:
I have been sitting here and reviewing and fact checking the Trump lies. There’s so many it’s just to difficult to address. I cal Sunday’s fact check Trump day while I watch football.

But I started thinking and thought I would throw this out. If you were to pick anybody in this country to debate Donald Trump that could expose him for his lack of knowledge who would you pick.

So my Dream debate would be Donald Trump and Steve Schmidt.

My reasoning is his incrediable Knowlege of the history of this country. He was a fiscal conservative since the day he registered to vote. He was John McCains campaign manager. That tells you the character of this man. He recently back in July to my surprise left the Republican Party because of his disgust for Donald Trump and the gutless republicans in congress to do any kind of checks and balances on Trump. Wow that was a surprise to me.

So come on let’s here some suggestions as to who can debate and expose Trump for the fraud he is.
I have been sitting here and reviewing and fact ch... (show quote)

My "Dream Debate" would be "Donald Trump vs. Donald Trump".
Page: <<prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 55 next>>
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.