nigel99

https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20200827-is-it-possible-to-rid-police-officers-of-bias
Interesting article. 

58 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

I applaud him standing up for what is right. Looting and destruction of property is not right.

 

So if a BLM person decided to step in and kill one of the police whose responsible for the killing of an innocent black person you would support their actions? Would they also get your applause?

1 hour ago, SkyDekker said:

You applaud an underage guy driving across state lines, illegally carrying a firearm to look for trouble. That is what you applaud? You think 17 year old kids should be driving around armed with rifles looking for people to shoot? You applaud them driving to other states to look for some vigilante justice...

 

But you think rioting is bad, looting is bad. Property crimes should be heavily enforced, maybe even send in the military.

You have any idea how incredibly fucked up you sound?

Vigilantes do appear to be the preserve of Trump supporters. There does appear to be some support for that amongst more than one of Trumps supporters on this forum. 
I find it quite interesting as from what I can see they are vocal about protesters and fight hard to defend the violence From “their” side of the fence. On the flip side I don’t recall any of the left wing/ liberals on this forum defending looters only peaceful protestors. It sure makes me wonder what the USA is going to face if Trump loses as it appears that he will be able to whip up a rebellion 

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

False equivalency. For example, I don't go to internet forums to jump with my team or have Thanksgiving dinner with my nieces. Here is different. Also, I am not suggesting a full blown battle royal. I simply don't think that calling a racist a racist when they're spouting racism on an internet forum crosses any necessary line. Given that racists invariably seem to not notice that they're racists it's really a sort of public service. On the other hand, we are allowed to call misogynists misogynists and make up funny names for crackpot conspiracy theorists which is good. 

Whatever Sangiro's dreams were was it's his playpen still and his rules are the rules. Back to family, maybe we all would be better off today if we had told Uncle Agnew he was a Trump bonehead and a dangerous conspiracy theorist when the occasions arose.

A couple of things. Firstly for the most part one thing we all have in common is that we are or were skydivers. So Wendy’a comment is very relevant to drop zones. Many of the longer term posters here have met and know each other outside of here. 

Secondly if the intent is to call someone out in the hope that they will change their views, doing it in public is the wrong way to go. Publicly deriding someone is likely to get them on the defensive and achieve nothing. We’ve got a private messaging function here. I think someone is far more likely to be open to adjusting their views when respectfully engaged in a private conversation. 

On 8/26/2020 at 8:06 AM, JoeWeber said:

Why not call a racist a racist? What's wrong with winning. Seriously Mod's, SC is becoming a reflection of the new crappy world we live in: be nice at TSA, no more back talking the cops, and don't offend aunt Esther who believes unbelievable bullshit. How about a new rule: if you can't take a jab post in Bonfire.

One of the nice things about SC and why I am still here is that we can hold different views and stay respectful. There are plenty of places where jabs and the like are the norm. 
I would rather people take their jabs and sea lion comments to personal messages and leave the threads to the topic and subject matter.

As for Jakee’s comment about politicians. I did not like Tony Blair’s policies, however he was possibly the most skilled politician at the art of equivocation. There was a BBC segment by a prof who wrote a book about it. It always amazed me that Tony Blair could leave both sides believing he was on their side. 

5 hours ago, kallend said:

And another thing!

Just when I get comfortable with a user interface and can find every "feature" I want, some damned developer (probably 15 years old) decides to "improve" it.

Reading all of your comments, has made me feel very young :)

1 hour ago, kallend said:

When US cops shoot more people in a month than UK cops shoot in 10 years, doesn't it lead you to think that maybe something is amiss? 

Accounting for population, US cops kill their citizens 70x more often than British cops do.

Maybe the UK cops are lousy shots

I think most of the world think America has a serious problem and don’t “get” the obsession with guns. 

1 hour ago, RonD1120 said:

This is a good summation.

I like how they have to rotate the logo to fit their narrative. Take a cross from the Christian church and invert it and you get a whole knew meaning.

44 minutes ago, yoink said:

Ron doesn’t rile me up because he’s very consistent in how he posts. He has belief and posts in line with those. While I might not understand some of his beliefs it doesn’t annoy me.

 

Other posters who I’ve blocked are as variable as a fart in the wind. They’re only in it for the internet points. THAT riles me up on a discussion forum.

I completely agree. Ron is an interesting poster. He’s very consistent, polite and certainly not a troll. The fact that I don’t understand his belief system is something I like about speakers corner - we are less of an echo chamber as we get exposed to diverse views 

1 hour ago, jakee said:

I don't really see the relevance either way. Sure, Google is going to show more Q results in the searches he does, but it's not going to tell him more people are searching for Q. They're two different things.

The relevance is that if people don’t understand the basics of “how” they are getting their information then they are not in a position to make informed decisions. And no this doesn’t change the fact that he was factually wrong on his statement about most searched term.

An unfortunate side effect of the whole targeted social media and search engine world is that more and more we live in an echo chamber. So  conspiracy theories like Q thrive as people are starved of alternative viewpoints.

I’ve never understood magical thinkers. How they can cling desperately to their alternative view of reality despite all the evidence. Remember Rhys with his 9/11 theories? This Q stuff is the same. Every effort to contain the misinformation is met as a confirmation of deep state involvement by the believers. It’s a real conundrum.

6 hours ago, yoink said:

That would make sense. My search history gets cleared at the end of every session so that didn’t even occur to me.

Actually clearing your search history doesn’t “solve” the google tracking issue.

However isn’t it slightly ironic that we are discussing some of the basic concepts of search engines to give someone the benefit of the doubt. When their belief system is built around them being “in the digital inner circle” of an internet group.

9 minutes ago, jakee said:

Yep. But I think they like it anyway because they can pretend to be in the Musketeers.

The whole Q movement reminds me of the secret clubs we ran as kids. Q is the grown up version of “Dirty Little Rascals”

For me the most worrying this is if they decide to “reclaim” the USA violently.

1 hour ago, jakee said:

Lol what? Possibly? It either is or it isn’t. 
 

What makes you think it ‘possibly’ is?

“What do you, liberal dems, have to offer that is more positive?“

 

I think just about anything is more positive than the message that the entire government is secretly run by a cabal of power hungry pedophiles and a virtual civil war is approaching because of it.

 

That doesn’t sound very positive to me at all.

A 30 second google search showed it to be an entirely false statement. Didn’t even make the top 100. Of course it’s the deep state and google manipulating the search results... Q says so

1 hour ago, RonD1120 said:

What do you, liberal dems, have to offer that is more positive?

QAnon is possibly the number one search topic on Google. Why is that? 

People are seeking more than statistics. They seek the hope of substance, not the declaration of hate.

 

https://ahrefs.com/blog/top-google-searches/
Sorry to burst your bubble Ron but it doesn’t even make the top 100 search terms in google.

On 8/9/2020 at 3:13 AM, olofscience said:

Don't you guys see, Turtle is doing the exact same as Trump - not making any definitive claims, but just trying to sow doubt.

That's because they will need that doubt in November.

Trump hardly knew him? Was he the guy who fetched hamburgers for Pence?

On 8/19/2020 at 9:18 PM, wolfriverjoe said:

Well, the convention speaker list is pretty telling.

The Ds had John Kasich and are reportedly planning on having Cindy McCain & Colin Powell.

The Rs are reportedly planning on having Nick Sandmann (the MAGA hat kid from the DC protests) and the McCloskeys (the St Louis couple who 'defended' their property with guns).

Got to appeal to the audience. Maybe the Dems would have done well to include one of the MAGA types? Maybe someone on the fringes of the movement.

Hate speech and right wing conspiracy theory...

What really gets me is how twisted it is that the believers are beyond any rational thought and will just see this as more evidence of the deep state etc.

A bit like those who believe 9/11 is a hoax or coverup. I would love to know if it would be possible to move these people from the magical thinking part of psychological growth to a more mature state. 
 

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/au/blog/happiness-in-world/200911/magical-thinking%3famp

12 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Ken,

And what is worse is that they actually believe it.  

Jerry Baumchen

One of the things I dislike about Australia is that we are a nanny state. As a general rule Aussie’s accept far more restrictions than other places I’ve lived

5 hours ago, Coreece said:

Yes I believe people use tithing to scam on others.  Others believe their tithes or whatever they give are used to maintain a church where they can fellowship with others and that's important to them, it's a reasonable expectation - nothing wrong with that.  Personal tithing or giving doesn't even have to go to a church.  And if someone is giving money just because they expect something in return, then I think they're the ones missing the point.

I agree with you on the principle of tithing. At one point and I’m sure in some areas it is to keep a roof over the full time religious people’s heads and maintenance of basic infrastructure. I think the monks tend to hold these values and all religions have these altruistic individuals (including Christians)

I grew up surrounded by the prosperity cult though, and was far from that. Church leaders accumulated immense wealth by exploiting the poor and vulnerable on the promise that they too would be blessed by giving. 

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/thewest.com.au/technology/google/google-warns-australians-against-new-media-law-in-open-letter-ng-b881640853z.amp
 

From yesterday Google had a warning symbol and link to an article warning about the proposed change in the law. I don’t know what is driving the change perhaps trying to combat fake news?

39 minutes ago, phantomII said:

Looks like Trump finally understands the 'percentage' thing.
Maybe someday he also gets the 'per capita' thing.

He will understand it when it fits his story

28 minutes ago, olofscience said:

<eyeroll> you're so predictable.

Well New Zealand had 13 new cases yesterday and Trump is calling it a 'terrible surge'. Thirteen.

The US had 40,612 new cases. Winning.

It’s all about percentage increase. If you go from one case to 13 it’s a 1200% increase, and if you go from 36 000 to 40 000 it’s only a 15% increase. 
/sarcasm

1 hour ago, normiss said:

Agreed. I just think the ignore function could use some tweaking.

I don't consider myself "superior" to anyone. That just struck me as flipping weird, rude, and a very odd thing to say.

Trolls here get away with more than the majority of social media platforms. It really defeats the effort to have discussions sometimes.

I’m really struggling with all of this. I don’t envy the mods at all. Where does the line between sheer stupidity and trolling lie? Is Trump a troll or stupid as an example?

The quality of discussion is suffering. It appears that most threads within a few posts get trolled, followed by a few tenacious posters who are intent on getting the troll(s) to own their posts, which has proven entirely pointless. Followed up by “don’t feed the trolls” posts and quite often then by a few of us complaining about the trolls.

Nobody has a gun to my head to stay on this forum. I’ve always enjoyed the “genuine” speakers corner content, and whether it is butting heads over religion, politics or guns However the signal to noise ratio is deteriorating:(

2 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

She says she is not a Qanon "candidate" and that she no longer "talks about it". Thats not saying that she no longer believes in it or doesn't follow it. Or doesn't believe in it.

I doubt this zebra is changing her stripes anytime soon. "On social media, many QAnon supporters expressed elation at Greene’s victory, viewing it as a coup for the cause. They were further emboldened by a tweet on Wednesday from President Trump, congratulating Greene on her victory. “Congratulations to future Republican Star Marjorie Taylor Greene on a big Congressional primary win in Georgia against a very tough and smart opponent. Marjorie is strong on everything and never gives up – a real WINNER!,” he wrote."

"I was just one of those people, just like millions of other Americans, that just started looking at other information," Greene said. "And so, yeah, there was a time there for a while that I had read about Q, posted about it, talked about it, which is some of these videos you've seen come out. But once I started finding misinformation, I decided that I would choose another path."
 

From the little I read about her I don’t think she’s a nice person. But I disagree with your conclusion about her public view in Q. “Once I found misinformation...” that is publicly distancing herself from Q. 

44 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Got a link for that?

What I found seems to say that she's still a full blown QCumber. 

Funny thing, most of the GOP congresscritters are distancing themselves from her and her racist, extreme conspiracy ideas. 

Of course, Trump is behind her full power. 

If what you say is true, that she's abandoned Q and their crap, that would be funny. As in really hilarious. Ingenious too.
Embrace the idiocy to get the idiots to vote for her in the primary, then dump them to get the moderate votes in the general. 

https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/marjorie-greene-georgia-gop-says-shes-not-a-qanon-candidate.amp
 

Don’t crucify me for posting from Fox. I thought I had seen it on the hill (about the only USA news source I read) but a google search turned up the same article I recalled seeing.